W/y^i^ 



Ji^M4. 


















"l^ i '^ 



^^ '/^ 



;<j-^/ 







LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



Slielf..-„Vy^ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



THE 



DIVINE AUTHORITY 



THE BIBLE. 



BY 

/ 

G. FREDERICK WRIGHT, 

PROFESSOR OF THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF THE NEW 

TESTAMENT IN OBERLIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ; AUTHOR 

OF "THE LOGIC OF CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES," " STUDIES 

IN SCIENCE AND RELIGION," "RELATION OF 

DEATH TO PROBATION," ETC., ETC. 






WASt- 



BOSTON: 

ffl^ongreptiattal .SuntJag^^cfjoal anti ^tibltsfjtns ^ocietg, 

CONGREGATIONAL HOUSE. 



:554- 



%o 



Copyright^ by 

Congregational S. S. and Publishing Society, 

1884. 



C. J. PETERS AND SON, 
ELECTROTYPERS AND STEREOTYPERS, 

145 High Street. 



TO 

E^t ilHemorg of mg ^ainteti ^Parents, 

WALTER AND MABY PEABODY WRIGHT, 

WHOSE WISDOM IN CHOOSING THE BIBLE FOR THE RELIGIOUS 

GUIDE OF THEIR FAMILY HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY 

ALL THE EXPERIENCE AND STUDY OF 

THEIR GRATEFUL SON, 

THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED 

BY THE AUTHOR. 



PEEFACB. 



The present brief treatise is an outgrowth of 
special studies in inductive logic, begun in the 
midst of pastoral labors sixteen or seventeen years 
ago ; and considerable portions of it were written 
at that time. The author found himself, as nearly 
all young pastors do when coming in practical 
contact with the unbelief of the age, compelled as 
never before to give a reason for the faith that was 
in him ; and was continually called upon to answer 
in the presence of the doubtful and unbelieving 
such questions as these: 1. What are both the 
general and specific grounds of confidence in the 
truths of the Christian relio;ion ? The author's an- 
swer to this question may be found in the little 
treatise on "The Logic of Christian Evidences," 
published four years ago. 2. How can the infalli- 

5 



Vm PKEFACE. 

tant from that which is irrelevant to the discussion, 
the volume is offered to all candid seekers after 
the truth upon the momentous questions involved. 

G. Frederick Wright. 

Oberlin, Ohio, June 2, 1884. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



[Subjects are referred to by paragraphs; Chapters by pages.] 



CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The Question one of Interpretation — Sphere of Inspiration, 
1 ; Logic as well as Learning necessary, 2 ; Christianity 
essentially Supernatural, 3-5 ; Therefore Inspiration prob- 
able, 6. (pp. 13-17.) 

CHAPTER II. 

THE PROMISE OF INSPIRATION. 

Unique Position of the Primitive Church, 7 ; The Apostolic 
Commission, 8, 9; Miraculous Power exercised, 10-13; 
Appealed to, 14. (pp. 18-25.) 

CHAPTER III. 

THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE CLAIMED AND 
ASSERTED. 

The Council at Jerusalem, 15; Claims of Paul, 16, 17; Peter's 
Acknowledgment of Paul, 18 ; Paul's Disclaimers consid- 
ered, 19, 20; The Book of Revelation, 21; All Inspired 
Scripture profitable, 22 ; The New Testament endorses the 
Old, 23, 24; The Scripture a Definite Collection of Books, 
25; Objections considered, 26; The Scriptures a Unit, 27; 
Subdivisions of Scripture, 28 ; Singular that Christ quoted 
nothing l)ut the Old Testament, 29 ; Theory of Accommo- 
dation inadmissible, 30 ; Old Testament Writers claimed 
Inspiration, — Summary of Argument, 31. (pp. 26-54.) 

9 



X CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE CAXON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 

Canon defined, 32 ; What constituted the Scriptures to whicli 
Christ appealed ? 33 ; Testimony of Jesus, the Son of 
Sirach, 34; Of the Apocrypha in general, 35; Josephus, 
36; Philo Judseus, 37; Melito, Bishop of Sardis, and Ori- 
gen, 38 ; Jerome and the Talmud, 39 ; Canonicity of the 
Apocrypha unsustained, 40 ; Reasons for its Adoption by 
the Komish Clmrch, 41. (pp. 55-68.) 

CHAPTER V. 

THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

Never formally settled, but Practical Unanimity reached 
before the Close of the Fourth Century by Common Con- 
sent, 42 ; Testimony of the Second Century, 43 ; Inherent 
Weight of this Testimony, 44; Evidence in Detail, 45; For 
the Epistle to the HebrcAvs, 46 ; Epistle of Jude, 47 ; James, 
48; Second and Third John, 49; Second Peter, 50; The 
Eevelation of John, 51 ; Superiority of the New Testament 
to the Epistle of Barnabas, 52 ; The Shepherd of Hennas, 53 ; 
The New Testament all written or endorsed by Apostles, 
54. (pp. 69-84.) 

CHAPTER VL 

INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 

Inspiration belongs only to the Autographs, 56; Material 
from which to determine the True Text, 57 ; Small Margin 
of Uncertainty, 58 ; Character of the Mass of Textual Va- 
riations, 59; Textual Criticism confirms rather than unset- 
tles Confidence, 60; Some of the Important Passages 
affected by Textual Criticism, 61 ; The Sinaitic and the 
Vatican Manuscripts proved to be the Best as well as the 
Oldest, 62 ; Natural Origin of Variations in the Text, 63, 
64 ; Textual Criticism a Science, 6o. (pp. 85-100.) 

CHAPTER VII. 

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 

Fallible Interpreters of an Infallible Recprd, 6Q\ Necessity 
of Reverence, 67 ; A Perfect Revelation must be in Human 



CONTENTS. XI 

Form, 68 ; The Obscure should be explained by what is 
more Clear, 69, 70; Interpret Scripture by Scripture, 71; 
Did the Writers of the New Testament know how to inter- 
pret the Old — Professors Toy and Ladd, Criticised, 72; 
Christ a Good Interpreter, 73; Christ's Interpretation of 
the Old Testament, 74; Paul's, 75; Formulas of Quotation, 
76 ; Difficult Quotations in Hebrews, 77 ; Pregnant Lan- 
guage, 78 ; Did Christ and Paul teach a Speedy Second 
Coming? 79; True Conservatism, 80; Things preliminary 
to Interpretation, 81; Elasticity of Language, 82; Illus- 
trated in explaining the Alleged Discrepancy regarding the 
Time of the Last Passover, 83 ; Still Language conveys 
Thought, 84 ; Formula for Interpretation, 85 ; Definite Re- 
sults possible, 86 ; The Bible intelligible, 87. (pp. 101-150.) 

CHAPTER VIII. 

SUMMARY OF POSITIVE ARGUMENT. 

There are Difficulties, S8; Argument condensed, 89; Tradi- 
tion of the Second Century all-important, 90 ; Intrinsic 
Excellence of the New Testament, 91; Testimony ample, 
92 ;Burden of Proof, 93. (pp. 151-156.) 

CHAPTER IX. 

INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 

Mode of Inspiration not essential, 94 ; Analogy with Nature, 
95 ; God's Designs many-sided, 96 ; Practical Character of 
the Discussion, 97 ; Analogy with the Doctrine of Christ's 
Nature, 98, 99; Elasticity of Language again, 100; True 
Accommodation, 101, 102; Reality" of Demoniacal Posses- 
sion, 103 ; Error belongs to Interpreters rather than to the 
Bible, 104. (pp. 157-170.) 

CHAPTER X. 

ALLEGED VERBAL DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE. 

Numerous in the Gospels, 105; Healing of Peter's Wife's 
Mother, 106 ; Christ stilling the Tempest, 107 ; Christ and 
the Rich Young Man, 108; Christ and the Pharisees on 
Divorce, 109; Diverse Inscriptions on the Cross, 110; In- 
structions given to the Twelve, 111, 112; Sermon on the 
Mount, 113, 114; There is Little that is New on the Sub- 
ject, 115. (pp. 171-183.) 



Xll CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER XI. 

ALLEGED ERRORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN QUOTING 
THE OLD. 

Christ's Refereuce to the Flood, 116; to the Famine in the 
Time of Elijah, 117; Quotation of Isa. xxix. 13, 118; Quo- 
tations in the Book of Hebrews, 119, 120; Summary of 
Results, 121. (pp. 184-194.) 

CHAPTER Xn. 

HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 

Genesis and Geology — First Theory of Reconciliation, 122; 
Second Theory, 123 ; Either Theory confirms the Bible, 
124 ; Chronology of the Bible, 125 ; Chronology of Science, 
126. (pp. 195-203.) 

CHAPTER Xin. 

PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE SAID TO BE INSIGNIFICANT OR 
UNWORTHY OF INSPIRATION. 

Analogies between Nature and the Bible, 127; Inspiration, 
like Design in Nature, Comprehensive, 128 ; Comprehen- 
siveness of the Design of the Bible, 129 ; Alleged Literary 
Infelicities, 130; The Bible an Organic Whole, 131; The 
Naturalness of the Bible a Part of its Perfection, 132; The 
Bible adapted to all Ages and Classes, 133; The Sterner 
Characteristics of the Bible still useful, 134; The Genea- 
logical Tables still valuable, 135. (pp. 204-217.) 

CHAPTER XIV. 

GENERAL SUMMARY. 

The Argument inductive — Method of Agreement, 136 ; 
Method of Difference, 137; Unity in Diversity of the 
Bible, 138; Its Freedom from Error, 139; The Harmony 
Profound, 140; The Writers avoid Speculation, 141; The 
Cause must be Divine, 142; Self-possession of the Writers, 
143 ; Providential Preservation of the Writers, 144 ; Accu- 
racy of the KnoAvn gives Confidence to the Whole Testi- 
mony, 145 ; We can ])elieve the Bil)le Avhere not confirmed 
by other Evidence, 146 ; The Word of God sure, 147. 
(pp. 218-232.) 



THE 



DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 



INTRODUCTION. 

1. Admitting that the more important books 
of the New Testament were written in apostolic 
times, and were generally accepted as authentic by 
the Christians of the first and second centuries,^ 
the question concerning the divine authority of 
these writings is largely one of interpretation. 
The question of the divine authority of the Old 
Testament likewise depends in large measure upon 
our interpretation of the words of Christ and his 
apostles as recorded in the New Testament. 

In treating of the divine authority of the Bible, 
we cannot well avoid using the word inspiration, 
but we would define the word with reference to 
the results attained rather than with reference to 
the divine process through which the results have 
been secured. In calling the Scriptures inspired 

1 The general question as to the credibility of the New Testa- 
ment has been discussed by the author in a preceding treatise, 
the Logic of Christian Evidences. Andover: W. F. Draper. 

1880. 

13 



14 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

and infallible, we intend to say that they are an 
adequate and authoritative record of the divine 
revelation upon which the Christian religion is 
founded, and that therefore they are, when prop- 
erly interpreted, the final appeal in all distinctive 
(][uestions of Christian faith and practice. For 
reasons which will appear as the discussion pro- 
ceeds, we prefer to retain the ordinary evangelical 
terms, and say, "the Bible is the word of God" 
and " the Bible is a revelation of God," rather than 
the more ambiguous phrases, "the Bible contains 
the word of God " and " the Bible contains a reve- 
lation." But the use of these terms does not shut 
us off from considering : 1st. What books con- 
stitute the Bible ? 2d. What corruptions are to 
be eliminated from the text? 3d. What meaning 
was the language of the Bible designed to convey ? 
Language is a means, and not an end. It is the 
sense and not the sound of scriptural language 
which has authority. 

2. Our decision with reference to the authority 
of Sacred Scripture is not dependent solely upon 
the extent of our learning, but largely upon the 
soundness of our judo-ment in estimatino'the weiofht 
of the well-established facts which are most central 
in the argument. Logic is even more important 
than learnins: in determinino^ the extent of the 
authority with which the Sacred Scriptures invest 
themselves. It is our Inisiness as investigators to 



INTRODUCTION . 1 5 

adhere to those facts which are fullest, clearest, 
and most fundamental in their bearing upon the 
question. If these facts seem to shut us off from 
the vague fields of speculation, in wliich our minds 
could rove unfettered, we are bound to remember 
that in all inductive researches fancy is compelled 
thus to wait on fact. 

3. Before attending directly to the specific facts 
bearing on the question concerning the divine 
origin of the Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testaments, it is important to consider the degree 
to which the supernatural element pervades the 
Christian religion. This supernatural element in 
Jewish history and in Christianity is alike surpris- 
ing for its extent and for its limitations. A mirac- 
ulous dispensation begins with Abraham and ends 
with the apostles, — with an intermission of about 
four hundred years between Malachi and John the 
Baptist. All the books of the Bible received as 
canonical by Protestants are, as we shall show in 
the proper place, supposed on good grounds to have 
been written during these two periods of special 
miraculous intervention. Outside of these books 
there is no trustworthy account of any special 
divine revelation. An important part of our in- 
quiry therefore relates to the adequacy of this 
revelation and of its record in the Bible. 

4. The acknowledged supernatural character of 
Christianity has an important bearing upon every 



16 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

department both of Christian evidences and of 
biblical interpretation. We are never at liberty 
to forget that the distinctive facts of Christianity 
are miraculous, and that its characteristic doc- 
trines depend for authority on supernatural en- 
dorsement. The corner-stone of our faith is the 
resurrection of Christ. Christ died and was buried, 
but on the third day he arose from the dead, and 
in due time ascended to heaven in the presence of 
his disciples. He who accepts this stupendous 
miracle will find little difficulty in crediting the 
minor miracles recorded in the Gospels. The 
scientific caution which can be carried by the force 
of evidence over the miracle of the resurrection — 
which lies at the threshold of Christianity — will 
find few additional impediments in the remaining 
miracles of the New Testament. 

5. A proper appreciation of the supernatural 
character of Ciiristianity likewise removes the 
antecedent improbability which would otherwise 
attach itself to the miracles of the Old Testament. 
The two dispensations stand or fall together, and 
the evidence in favor of each is confirmatory of 
both. In accepting the crowning miracle of 
Christianity we acknowledge the presence of a 
cause which is fully adequate to the production of 
all the other alleged supernatural facts of Sacred 
Scripture, and at the same time concede the exist- 
ence of a reason or final cause sufficiently important 



INTRODUCTION. 17 

to remove all supposed antecedent probability 
asfainst the Introduction of miracles. 

6. The miraculous facts of Christianity also 
prepare the way for our belief in (and indeed make 
antecedently probable) the exercise of a super- 
natural agency sufBcient to secure such an authori- 
tative, intelligible, and adequate written record 
and exposition of the facts and doctrines of the 
gospel as is essential to its continued preservation 
and propagation in the world. It is scarcely credi- 
ble that such a stupendous system of supernatural 
agencies as was deemed necessary to introduce 
Christianity, should be left without an intelligible, 
authoritative, and adequate record. Still, the 
difficulty of determining beforehand, upon general 
principles, what the Creator ought to do, is so 
great that we should not rely too much upon this 
class of evidence in ascertainino; what he has 
actually done. It is more important to turn first 
to the Bible itself, in whose general credibility we 
already believe, to learn what the sacred writers 
themselves say of the authority by which they 
speak, and to ascertain from direct examination 
the various literary and other characteristics of 
the volume ; and secondly, to the history of the 
primitive church, to ascertain tha. value set upon 
the books of the Old and New Testaments by 
those who, by reason of proximity both in time 
and place, were most competent to estimate the 
validity of their claims. 



18 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 



II. 



THE PROMISE OF INSPIRATION. 

7. The primitive church was unique in its 
relation to the founder of Christianity. The first 
believers enjoyed the presence and the personal 
instruction of their Lord. They declared that 
which they had heard, that which they had seen 
Avith their eyes and beheld, and their hands had 
handled, concerning the Word of life.^ The 
apostles and their companions can therefore, on 
this account, speak with a degree of authority 
which no other w^riters could claim. But, besides 
this superior advantage of position with reference 
to their Master, the authority of the apostles is 
enhanced by various remarkable and definite 
promises given them both when they were chosen 
and at a later period of their Lord's ministry. 

8. When the apostles were set apart, Jesus in- 
timated to them that they were to be delivered up 
to judgment before synagogues, and rulers, and 
authorities ; but he warned them not to be anxious 
concerning their answer and defence ; for he 
1 1 John i. 1. 



THE PROMISE OF INSPIRATION. 19 

assured them, " the Holy Spirit shall teach you in 
that very hour what ye ought to say." ^^It is 
not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father 
that speaketh in you."^ Our estimate of the 
supernatural character of this promise is aug- 
mented by the fact that Christ bestowed upon 
these disciples the power of performing miracles. 
And he "gave them authority over unclean spirits, 
to cast them out, and to heal all manner of disease 
and all manner of sickness." ^ 

9. The fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth 
chapters of John describe the scene when Jesus dis- 
coursed with the apostles for the last time before 
his crucifixion. Upon this solemn occasion he re- 
peated to them, with added emphasis and illustra- 
tion, the promises given upon their induction into 
the apostolic oflSce. He assures them that the 
Father will send in his own name the Comforter, 
even the Holy Spirit, who shall teach them all 
things, and bring to their remembrance all that 
he has said unto them.^ That this promise is 
specially applicable to the apostles and their com- 
panions, and is limited to them, is indicated in the 
fact that the Spirit was to quicken their memory 
so that they could recall the verbal teachings of 
Christ. A simihir promise is given in the follow- 
ing chapter, where the Comforter, "even the 

1 Matt. X. 19, 20; Mark xiii. 11; Luke xii. 11, 12; cf. also Luke 
xxi. 14, 15. 

2 Matt. X. 1 ; Luke ix. 1. ^ john xiv. 26. 



20 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father," 
is again promised to his disciples, and Christ as- 
sures them that the Comforter "shall bear witness 
of me : and ye also bear witness, because ye have 
been with me from the beo^innino^." ^ Ao-ain, the 
Saviour tells the apostles that " when he, the Spirit 
of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the 
truth, . . . and he shall declare unto you the things 
that are to come. He shall glorify me ; for he 
shall take of mine, and shall declare it unto you." ^ 
Such was the commission of the apostles ; and so 
precise and emphatic was the authority with which 
they were invested to speak in Christ's name. Is 
it possible to believe that the Spirit would be given 
to secure accuracy in the spoken word, and not 
also be given to secure perfection in the written 
word? No. For the principle is certainly valid, 
that the Lord who promises to provide for the less 
important emergency, will take even greater care 
to provide for the more important want. The 
promise is therefore comprehensive, and includes 
the written word as well as the spoken. 

10. We have abundant evidence that the part 
of Christ's promise to the apostles relating to 
their power to perform miracles, was literally ful- 
filled. When the seventy returned from their 
journey, it was "with joy, saying. Lord, even the 
devils are subject unto us in thy name."" After 
1 John XV. 26, 27. 2 john xvi. 12-15. ^ Luke x. 17. 



THE PKOMISE OF INSPIRATION. 21 

Christ's ascension, we read in the Acts of a great 
variety of miracles performed by the apostles and 
their associates. In connection with the outpour- 
ing of the Spirit, at the day of Pentecost, we are 
told that ^^many wonders and signs were done by 
the apostles " ; ^ and it was not much later that 
Peter and John publicly, in the name of Jesus 
Christ of Nazareth, healed by a word a lame man 
who had been a cripple from birth. ^ The death 
of Ananias and Sapphira must also be regarded as 
miraculous.^ And it is added in immediate con- 
nection that ^^'^^ " by the hands of the apostles were 
many signs and wonders wrought among the 
people ; and they were all with one accord in 
Solomon's porch. ^^^^ But of the rest durst no man 
join himself to them ; howbeit the people magni- 
fied them ; ^^*^ and believers were the more added 
to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women ; 
^^^^ insomuch that they even carried out the sick into 
the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, 
that, as Peter came by, at the least his shadow 
might overshadow some one of them. ^^^^ And 
there also came together the multitude from the 
cities round about Jerusalem, bringing sick folk, 
and them that w^ere vexed with unclean spirits ; 
and they were healed ever}^ one."'* 

At a later period we read that when Peter went 

' Acts ii. 43. 2 Acts iii. 1-10. 

3 Acts V. 1-11. 4 Acts V. 12-16. 



22 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

down to Lydda he found there ^^^ " a certain man 
named -zEneas, which had kept his bed eight years ; 
for he was palsied. ^^^^ And Peter said unto him, 
^neas, Jesus Christ healeth thee : arise, and make 
thy bed. And straightway he arose. ^^^^ And all 
that dwelt at Lydda and in Sharon saw him, and 
they turned to the Lord."^ 

At the same time, near by, at Joppa, Peter is 
reported to have restored Dorcas unto life.^ In 
connection with both these miracles we are in- 
formed that many believed on the Lord." ^ 

11. Stephen, also, obtained his remarkable in- 
fluence not only because he was full of grace and 
power, but also because he ^Svrought great wonders 
and signs among the people."^ 

12. Philip, likewise, is reported to have pub- 
licly exercised miraculous power, both to convince 
the people of Samaria and to confound a celebrated 
sorcerer of that city named Simon. ^^^ "And Philip 
went down to the city of Samaria, and proclaimed 
unto them the Christ. ^^^And the multitudes gave 
heed with one accord unto the things that were 
spoken by Philip, when they heard and saw the 
signs which he did. ^^^ For from many of those 
which had unclean spirits, they came out, crying 
with a loud voice : and many that were palsied, 
and that were lame, were healed. ^^^And there Avas 

1 Acts ix. 33-35. ^ ^cts ix. 36-41. 

3 Acts ix. 42. * Acts vi. 8. 



THE PROMISE OF INSPIRATION. 23 

much joy in that city. . . . ^^^^And Simon also 
himself believed : and being baptized, he continued 
with Philip ; and beholding signs and great miracles 
wrought, he was amazed." ^ 

13. The miracles ascribed to Paul are as numer- 
ous as those to Peter. On their first missionary 
journey Paul and Barnabas, while on the island of 
Cyprus, were opposed b}^ Elymas, the sorcerer. 
Paul was enabled to resist him by bringing upon 
him a miraculous blindness. ^^ And now, behold, 
the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt 
be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And 
immediately there fell on him a mist and a dark- 
ness ; and he went about seeking some to lead him 
by the hand." ^ On the same journey, at Iconium, 
we are told that when Paul and Barnabas spoke 
boldly in the Lord, the Lord bore " witness unto 
the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders 
to be done by their hands." ^ And at LystraPaul 
is related to have publicly healed a man who had 
been a helpless cripple from his birth.* 

On the second missionary journey, when Paul 
reached Philippi, he Avas annoyed by a young 
woman said to have been possessed with a spirit of 
divination. And ''Paul, being sore troubled, 
turned and said to the spirit, I charge thee in the 

1 Acts viii. 5-8, 13. 2 Acts xiii. 11. 

3 Acts xiv. 3. * Acts xiv. 10. 



24 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And 
it came out that very hour." ^ 

Upon his third missionary journey, it is related 
that while Paul was preaching at Troas a certain 
young man, named Eutychus, fell from a third 
story window, '' and was taken up dead. ^^^^ And 
Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing 
him said, Make ye no ado ; for his life is in him. 
. . . ^^^^ And they brought the lad alive, and were 
not a little comforted." ^ 

Again, during the voyage to Rome the barbarous 
inhabitants of Melita saw Paul bitten by a viper 
w^ithout suftering harm, and were persuaded that 
he w^as a god.^ At the same time, also, Paul 
prayed, and laid his hands upon the father of 
Publius, and thereby healed him of the fever and 
dysentery with which he was prostrated. "And 
Avhen this was done, the rest also which had diseases 
in the island came, and were cured."* 

14. With this enumeration of apostolic miracles 
should be connected a passage in Hebrews, where 
the writer confidently appeals, as if it were well 
known to his readers, to the fact that the great 
salvation, which was at first ^^^ "spoken through the 
Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard ; 
^^^ God also bearing witness w^ith them, both by 
signs and w^onders, and by manifold powers, and 

1 Acts xvi. 18. 2 Acts XX. 10, 12. 

2 Acts xxviii. 1-6. * Acts xxviii. 9. 



THE PROMISE OF INSPIRATION. 25 

by gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own 
will;"^ Paul makes a similar appeal in his letter 
to the church at Rome, affirming that to secure the 
obedience of the Gentiles, Christ worked through 
him " by word and deed, in the power of signs and 
wonders, in the power of the Hol}^ Ghost." ^ In 
the Second Epistle to the Corinthians Paul makes 
a like appeal to well-known miracles by which his 
apostolic authority had been established before 
them. ^^^^ "For in nothing was I behind the very 
chiefest apostles, though I am nothing. •^^^^ Truly 
the signs of an apostle were wrought among you 
in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty 
works. "^ 

It thus appears that the apostles and their com- 
panions were led by Christ to expect supernatural 
confirmation of the truth they were commissioned 
to preach ; and that, according to the whole his- 
tory, such confirmation was abundantly provided. 
This fact greatly increases the antecedent presump- 
tion that supernatural aid would be granted to 
secure for coming ages an authentic and authori- 
tative record of the original facts and doctrines out 
of which Christianity as a living force has sprung, 
and upon which it must ever depend for its char- 
acteristic motives to activity. 

1 Heb. ii. 3, 4. 2 ;Rom. xv. 18, 19. ^ 2 Cor. xii. 11, 12. 



26 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 



III. 

THE DIYIOT: AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE CLAIMED 
AKD ASSERTED. 

15. We will next examine the writings of the 
New Testament, to ascertain whether the apostles 
claimed tke fulfilment in themselves of the prom- 
ises of the special presence with them of the 
Holy Spirit. Turning to Acts xv. 28, we find the 
disciples closing the deliberations of a most im- 
portant council with the following remarkal)le 
words: "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, 
and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than 
these necessary things." It would seem difficult 
to devise a more distinct statement of the actual 
possession of a divine commission, and of divine 
authority, than is found in the clause here, which 
identifies as one the iud^'ment of the Holv Ghost 
and that of the apostles. 

16. In the writings of Paul the claim of divine 
authority for his words is most frequently put forth. 
The comparative silence of the other apostles as 
to their authority, doubtless arises from the fact 
that there Avas no class of l)elievers who ever dis- 
puted it. The authority of Paul, however, was 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 27 

repeatedly challenged, and his right to be classed 
among the apostles had to be established in face of 
the fact that he had not been a companion of the 
Lord, but had communed with him only in visions 
and trances. It is well, therefore, to notice how 
emphatically and repeatedly he claims the authority 
of apostleship, — a claim which in his lifetime be- 
came universally recognized. In the earliest of 
his Epistles^ we find him thanking God that when 
the church at Thessalonica received the word of 
the message, even the word of God from him, they 
^' accepted it not as the word of men, but, as it is 
in truth, the word of God." In other Epistles of 
this same period, the claim of divine authority for 
his own words is often repeated. He distinctly 
asserts his apostleship in as man}^ as nine Epistles. 
In the first verse of Romans, he declares he was 
"called to be an apostle," and later in the Epistle 
he styles himself the "apostle of the Gentiles."^ 
And he congratulates the church at Ephesus, that 
they are " built upon the foundation of the apostles 
and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief 
corner-stone."^ The confidence with which the 
primitive Christians regarded the facts -upon w^iich 
their hopes of salvation rested, appears in a strik- 

1 1 Thess. ii. 13. 

2 See similar assertions 1 Cor. i. 1; ix. 1, 2; xv. 9; 2 Cor. i. 1; 
xi. 5; xii. 11, 12; Gal. i. 1; Epli. i. 1; Col. i. 1; 1 Tim. i. 1; ii. 7; 
2 Tim. i. 1, 11; Titus i. 1. 

3 Eph. ii. 20. 



28 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

ing passage already quoted^ from the Book of 
Hebrews, which reads as follows : ^'^^ How shall we 
escape, if we neglect so great salvation? which 
having at the first been spoken through the Lord, 
was confirmed unto us by them that heard ; ^^^ God 
also bearing witness with them, both by signs and 
wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts 
of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will."^ 
Another passage, comparing the words of the 
apostles to those of the prophets, is found in 
Second Peter : '^ That ye should remember the 
words which were spoken before by the holy pro- 
phets, and the commandment of the Lord and 
Saviour through your apostles."^ 

17. More specifically Paul calls upon the pre- 
tended prophets and spiritual teachers in Corinth 
to take knowledge of the things which he ^vas 
writino; unto them, that thev are the commandment 
of the Lord.^ And in Galatians we find him em- 
phatically saying : ^^^^ "For I make known to you, 
brethren, as touching the gospel which was 
j)reached by me, that it is not after man. ^^^^ For 
neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught 
it, but it came to me through revelation of Jesus 
Christ.'' 5 

18. In Second Peter there seems to be a dis- 

1 Paragraph 14. *^ lieb. ii. 3, 4. 

3 2 Peter iii. 2. * \ Cor. xiv. 37. 

5 Gal. i. 11, 12. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 29 

tinct announcement of PiiuFs authority, in whicli 
the writer declares that in Paul's Epistles there 
^' are some things hard to be understood, which the 
ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as tliey do also the 
other Scriptures, unto their own destruction." ^ 
The noteworthy thing in this passage is that Paul's 
writings are compared with the other Scriptures; 
from which it follows that they had already at- 
tained the position of dignity and consideration 
accorded to the Old Testament. 

19. At this point we are bound to notice a few 
exceptional passages, in which Paul seems to dis- 
claim divine authority. In Rom. iii. 5 Paul says 
parenthetically , " I speak after the manner of men " ; 
but this refers to the quotation from a supposed 
objector, whose sentiments he had introduced 
simply that he might refute them. In Rom. vi. 
19 and Gal. iii. 15, the same phrase means that 
the apostle ^^ uses language borrow^ed from common 
life, which may be easily understood." ^ 

20. The seventh chapter of First Corinthians 
contains what seem at first to be more serious 
objections, but which wholly disappear upon close 
examination. Paul is here olivine: instructions con- 
cerning the behavior of married people upon 
points of conduct for which no absolute rule can 
be laid down. He therefore says in verse 6 : 
"This I say by way of permission, not of com- 

1 2 Peter iii. 15, 16. ^ gtuart on Komans, p. 226. 



30 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

mandment"; and in verse 12, having quoted from 
the words of Christ (whom he designates as the 
Lord), Paul adds : '^ But to the rest say I, not the 
Lord." In this, however, he does not disclaim 
apostolic authority, but simply indicates that 
his authority is in this case direct as touching a 
point of conduct concerning which Christ had not 
spoken. Li verse 25, likewise, in giving com- 
mandment concerning virgins, he finds no special 
words of Christ which apply, and hence he gives 
his own judgment, "as one that hath obtained 
mercy of the Lord to be faithful." In the advice 
which follows, dissuading from marriage, it w\as 
not possible to lay down an}^ unvarying rule ; but 
no one would deny that, as a general thing, in such 
times of distress as the apostle's words indicate, 
contemplated marriage had better be deferred. 
Likewise, in the fortieth verse, the advice which 
the apostle gives to widows, respecting second 
marriage in the circumstances of the period, he 
says, "is after my judgment, and I think that I 
also have the Spirit of God." If Paul thought he 
had it, he doubtless did have it. 

Passages in the eleventh and twelfth chapters of 
Second Corinthians are also thought by some to 
disclaim inspiration, — in some portions at least of 
the apostle's writings. Indeed, Eev. C. A. Eow, 
a recent A^oluminous writer upon this subject, 
regards these chapters as by far the most important 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 31 

of all in proof of the alleged fact, that the apostle 
did not uniformly write " in virtue of the super- 
natural illumination which had been imparted to 
him" ; but that he sometimes wrote "m his purely 
human character." ^ The passage which is conclusive 
to Dr. Row's mind is the following: -'That which 
I speak, I speak not after the Lord, but as in 
foolishness, in this confidence of glorying."^ Dr. 
Row is positive in his opinion that ^'to affirm tha;t 
he [Paul] wrote passages of this kind at the dic- 
tation of the Divine Spirit, or as a record of his 
revelations, is to contradict his own express asser- 
tions." This positiveness, however, is entirely 
unw^arranted, as a comprehensive examination of 
the context will clearly show. For in the eleventh 
and tw^elfth verses of the twelfth chapter the 
apostle specially emphasizes the authority with 
which he spoke, saying, that ^^^^ " in nothing was I 
behind the very chiefest apostles, though I am 
nothing. ^^-^ Truly the signs of an apostle were 
wrought among you in all patience, by signs and 
wonders and mighty works." This is preceded by 
the statement that the Corinthians had compelled 
him to become foolish, referring evidently to the 
foolishness spoken of in the preceding chapter. 
In view of this the literary character of the pas- 

1 See Revelation and Modern Theology Contrasted, pp. 
113 ff. 

2 2 Cor. xi. 17. 



32 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

sages at once becomes evident. In general Paul 
condemns the practice of self-boasting, as not in 
accordance with the Lord's will. It is not a thins: 
to be approved in itself; but circumstances compel 
him to make an exception to the rule, and seem- 
ingly to speak in a boastful spirit ; and this he 
does ; but it is their perverseness that compels him 
to this seeming folly. Thus a tone of mild irony 
is given to the passage ; and no inference can be 
drawn from it adverse to the ordinary doctrine of 
inspiration. In this light the best interpreters 
have always regarded it. 

21. Eeturning to the positive evidence, we note 
that in the Book of Revelation John declares that 
he Avas ^Mn the Spirit on the Lord's day "^ when 
he heard the great voice, and that he was told to 
write it "in a book, and send it to the seven 
churches"; and again. Revelation closes by pro- 
nouncing woes upon those who shall either add 
to or take from the words of the book of this 
prophecy.^ 

22. To comprehend the full meaning of the fact 
(referred to above) ^ that Peter speaks of Paul's writ- 
ings as of equal authority with "other Scriptures," 
it is necessary at this point to consider the place 
which Old Testament Scriptures had in the esteem 
of the primitive believers. This will also aid us 
to understand both the scope of the promises of 

1 Bev. i. 10, 11. 2 p,ev, xxii. 18, 19. ^ Paragraph 18. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 33 

inspiration given by Christ to his disciples, and 
the significance of the apostolic claims respecting 
the authority of their words. 

The last four verses of the third chapter of 
Second Timothy furnish an appropriate introduc- 
tion to a brief study of the question concern- 
ing the authority rightfully to be ascribed to the 
Old Testament : ^^^^ "But abide thou in the things 
which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, 
knowing of whom thou hast learned them. ^^^^And 
that from a babe thou hast known the sacred 
writings [leou yoduiuaTa'] which are able to make thee 
wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ 
Jesus. ^^^^ Every Scripture [7iacr« ygacpri'] inspired of 
God [Otdnvsvoiog'j is also profitable for teaching, 
for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is 
in righteousness : ^^^^ that the man of God may be 
complete, furnished completely unto every good 
work." 

Scholars are not agreed as to the translation of 
the sixteenth verse in this quotation. The more 
natural rendering would be, '^AU Scripture is in- 
spired and profitable," making it a direct assertion 
of the inspiration of the Old Testament. But 
there is not so much depending upon this transla- 
tion as is often supposed and represented. Taking 
it as it is in the Revised Version, we have the 
divine authority of the whole Old Testament both 
assumed and asserted in a most emphatic manner. 



o4 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

The inspiration of the Scripture referred to was 
not questioned either by Timothy or any other 
pious Jew. Tliis we will presently show. It is 
a very important assertion, then, which is made 
when it is said that every portion of this Scripture 
is profitable. 

Examining the passage in detail, we notice in 
verse 14 that Timothy is exhorted to abide in the 
things which he had learned and of which he had 
been assured, knowing of whom he had learned 
them. This is an assertion of Paul's own author- 
ity, for he was Timothy's instructor in Christianity. 
In verse 15 Paul asserts that the sacred writings 
{iequ Y()Ufifj(xTa) ill which Timothy had been instructed 
were able to make him " wise unto salvation, 
throuo'h faith which is in Christ Jesus." There 

o 

can be no question that the ''sacred writings" in 
verse 15 and "every Scripture" in verse 16 refer 
to the same thing. 

What, now, is this to which they refer? 

23. There are in the New Testament more than 
six hundred instances in which expressions have 
been incorporated into it from the Old Testament. 
But in the majority of cases these are simply 
appropriations of language, such as one writer 
might make from another, — indicating no more 
than great respect and familiarity. These are, 
however, important as showing the extent to which 
the thouo'hts in the New Testament are cast in the 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. . 35 

forms of the Old. For example, the words of 
Mary, the mother of Jesus, in response to Eliza- 
beth's salutation,^ are largely made up of sentences 
from the Old Testament which would be applica- 
ble to the experience of any atflicted person to 
whom the Lord had shown great mercy. 

24. There is, however, another class of quo- 
tations, which are introduced in such a manner that 
divine authority is ascribed specifically to the Old 
Testament, both in its parts and as a whole. The 
phrases in which this authority is ascribed are 
various, and illustrate all the more by their variety 
the pervasiveness of the sentiment which ascribed 
divine authority to the Old Testament. Some- 
times the quotation is introduced by the phrase ^'It 
is written" ; which does not mean merely that it 
was written somewhere, by somebody, but, as the 
context will show, it was authoritatively Avritten ; 
and the quotations introduced by this phrase are 
nlways from some book of the Old Testament 
as we now have it. Again, the quotations are fre- 
quently introduced by the phrases ''It was written 
by the prophet," ''It was spoken of the Lord b}^ 
the prophet," "It was written by the prophet or 
prophets,'' — sometimes mentioning them l\y name, 
and sometimes not. Again, when the command- 
ments of the Old Testament are quoted, Christ, 
accordino' to one evano-elist,^ introduces them as 
1 Luke i. 51-55. '^ Matt. xv. 4. 



36 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

what ''God said"; according to another,^ as 
what ''Moses said." Again, a quotation is 
variously introduced as being the "prophecy 
of Isaiah,"^ or as Avhat "Isaiah said,"^ or as what 
the "Holy Ghost spake by Isaiah the prophet."* 
For example, Ex. iii. 6 is referred to in Matt, 
xxii. 31 and Mark xii. 26 as what was "spoken by 
God" ; in Luke xx. 37, as something which "Moses 
shewed." In the same manner Christ, according 
to Matthew^ and Mark,^ quotes the one hundred 
and tenth Psalm as what David said in the 
Spirit or by the Holy Ghost ; while, according 
to Luke,^ Christ refers to it as something David 
himself had said in the Book of Psalms ; and in 
Heb. i. 13 God himself is said to have spoken the 
words. Ex. xxxiii. 19 is quoted bj' PauP as what 
God said to Moses; Avhile Ex. ix. 16, which con- 
tains God's direct address to Pharaoh, is introduced 
by PauP as what the Scripture saith. Lev. xviii. 
5 is a direct address of God to the people ; PauP^' 
introduces it, however, as something which Moses 
had said. Deut. xxxii. 21 is represented as what 
God said ; PauP^ introduces it as Avhat Moses said. 
1 Kings xix. 18 is endorsed by PauP^ as what God 
said unto Elijah. Other places where New Tesla- 

1 Mark vii. 10. 2 ]yxatt. xiii. 14. ^ joim xii. 39. 

^ Acts xxviii. 25. '' Matt. xxii. 43. ^ jyxark xii. 36. 

' Luke XX. 42. ^ Rom. ix. 15. ^ Rom. ix. 17. 

10 Rom. X. 5. 11 Rom. x. 19. i-^ Rom. xi. 4. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 37 

ment writers introduce Old Testament passages as 
words that were spoken b}^ God, are Eom. xv. 10 
and 2 Cor. vi. 16. Throughout the Book of 
Hebrews the numerous quotations from the Old 
Testament are, almost without exception, intro- 
duced as the direct words of God, with no allusion 
to the individual writers. ^ 

25. In more than fifty places in th^ New Testa- 
ment an appeal is made to 'Hhe Scripture" or " the 
Scriptures" in such a way as to show that those 
words were as definite in their meaning then as 
they are now among evangelical Protestants. In- 
deed, the words i^ /oort^?] {liee grapliee) and wi ygucpai 
(hai grapltai) are used in the New Testament with 
all the varied shades of meaning in Avhich we now 
employ the words ^^ Scripture " and ^'Scriptures." 
The etymology of the word has ceased to define 
its meaning, and it signifies not any ivriting or 
ivritings in general, but a specific class of writings 
possessing divine authority. To them as such 
Christ and the apostles appeal with the utmost 
confidence as being within their sphere, when 
properly interpreted, final and infallible authority. 
This will appear from an inspection of the usage. 
In more than fifty places in the New Testament, 
as already remarked, an appeal is made to the 
jScriptiire or Scrijptures as an authority which must 

1 See Heb. i. 6, 7, 8; ii. 12; iii. 7; iv. 3, 4; v. 0; x. 5, 15; xii. 
26; xiii. 5. 



38 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

be final. For example, in Mark xii. 10, 11 
Jesus, in appropriating a portion of the one hun- 
dred and eighteenth Psalm, asks in an impassioned 
address : ^'Have ye not read even this Scripture ; 
Tlie stone which the builders rejected," etc? In 
the parallel passage in Matthew the plural is used, 
"Did ye never read in the Scriptures?"^ while in 
Luke the quotation is introduced simply by the 
l)hrase, "What then is this that is written?"^ In 
John vii. 40-43 the multitudes dispute concerning 
the authoritative claims put forth by Christ; and 
his opponents, supposing he came out of Galilee, 
appeal to "the Scripture" to prove tliat the Christ 
was to have been born in Bethlehem. Again, in 
John X. 35 Christ confutes his adversaries by 
quoting and interpreting a portion of the Old 
Testament, and enforces his argument by the asser- 
tion that "the Scripture cannot be broken." In 
John xix. 24, 28, 36, and 37 it is said that the 
parting of the Saviour's raiment among the soldiers, 
his cry for drink, the failure to break his bones, 
and the piercing of his side, each and all took place 
in order that the Scripture should be fulfilled. In 
John XX. 9 we read that the disciples did not yet 
know "the Scripture, that he must rise again from 
the dead." In Acts i. 16 Peter assures the other 
disciples that the death of Judas was a needful 
fulfilment of Scripture "which the Holy Ghost 

* Matt. xxi. 42. ^ L^^i^e xx. 17. 



CLAIMED AND ASSEKTED; 39 

spake before by the mouth of David." In Acts 
viii. 35 Philip begins "from this Scripture"^ 
which the eunucli was reading, and preaches to him 
Jesus. In Rom. iv. 3 ; ix. 17 ; x. 11 the apostle 
appeals to what the Scripture saith, to convince his 
readers of the truth of the doctrines he is pre- 
senting. In Rom. xi. 2 a quotation from 1 Kings 
xix. 10, 14 is referred to as what the " Scripture 
saith of Elijah." Gal. iii. 8 speaks of the Scrip- 
ture as preaching the gospel beforehand unto 
Abraham,^ and verse 22 speaks of the Scripture 
as having shut up all under sin (that is, proved 
that all men are sinners, in need of God's grace). 
Another appeal to the Scripture, where the refer- 
ence is to Genesis,^ is found in Gal. iv. 30. In 
1 Tim. V. 18 Paul points his argument by saying 
that "the Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle 
the ox when he treadeth out the corn.* And, The 
laborer is worthy of his hire." This passage is 
thought by some to quote Luke as a part of 
Sacred Scripture ; since the second clause of the 
quotation is not found in the Old Testament, but 
it occurs in Luke x. 7. In 2 Tim. iii. 16 we find 
the passage (already quoted)^ to the under- 
standing of which the present part of our discus- 
sion pertains. FoUovv^ing the Revised Version it 
reads : '' Every Scripture inspired of God is also 

1 Isa. liii. 7. ^ Qgn. xii. 3. ^ Qen. xxi. 10, 12. 

"^ Dent. XXV. 4. ^ Paragraph 22, 



40 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, 
for instruction whicii is in righteousness." Even 
with this rendering, it would be wholly unwar- 
ranted to infer that any portion of Scripture was 
regarded as uninspired. The object is to state the 
profitableness of such Scripture for teaching, etc., 
and that every part of it was profitable because in- 
spired. In Jas. ii. 8, 23 ; iv. 5 quotations are 
introduced from Leviticus,^ Genesis,^ and Ecclesi- 
astes,^ with the assertions that these are " according 
to the Scripture," "fulfil the Scripture," or '' Avhat 
the Scripture saith." In 1 Peter ii. 6 quotations 
from Isaiah^ and Psalms^ are introduced as " con- 
tained in Scripture." In 2 Peter i. 20 we are told 
that "no prophecy of Scripture is of private inter- 
pretation," and that "no prophecy ever came by 
the will of man ; but men spake from God, being 
moved by the Holy Ghost." 

In all these instances the singular number is 
used, and in nearly every case the definite 
article is present, indicating that the w^riting 
referred to is to be distinguished from other 
writings. " The singular is employed merely 
in reference to the whole collection in its unity." 
The Avritings, though not bound together in one 
book in ancient times, were bound together in 
thought by the pervading element of divine 

1 Lev. xix. 18. '^ Gen. xv. 0. ^ Eccl. iv. 4. 

^ Isa. xxviii. 16. ^ Ps. cxviii. 22. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 41 

authority which pertained to them all ; and this 
idea of divine authority separated them from all 
other writings. 

26. In opposition to the views here presented, 
it is maintained by some/ that where the singular 
form of the word '^ Scripture " is used (as in the 
passages quoted) , the reference is not to the Scrip- 
ture as a whole, but to a particular part of the 
Scripture. Such persons would account for the 
uniform presence of the article by supposing that 
the writer meant in each case to limit his assertion 
to the particular passage quoted. This, however, 
is certainly an erroneous view, arising from an in- 
complete examination of the cases. It is true, as 
Lightfoot says, that we occasionally have the ex- 
pressions "another Scripture,"^ "this Scripture,"^ 
" every Scripture " ; ^ but even these cases do not 
prove the point. The sacredness of a well-known 
and specific body of writings is implied and as- 
sumed, and the specific element of sacredness is 
still in the word. " Another Scripture " is equiva- 
lent to " another part of Scripture." In our 
lanouao:e there is an analoo^ous use in the word 
" hymn" ; and we might write ^^as the hymn says " ; 
in which case, unless w^e had mentioned some col- 
lection like the Vedic hymns, no one would under- 
stand us to refer to anything except to a well- 

1 Lightfoot on Gal. iii. 23. ^ John xix. 37. 

3 Luke iv. 21. * 2 Tim. iii. 16. 



42 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

known body of hymns having some specific 
character which is assumed to be in the minds of 
those addressed. Tlie specific sacred character of 
the writing referred to as ri y^a^rj (the Scripture) 
is unquestionable in tlie majority of cases, and 
those furnish the rule.^ The exceptions noticed 
really prove the rule when properly considered. 
The use of the article to indicate that the specific 
characteristics of an individual are made promi- 
nent, is so familiar as not to demand extended 
illustration. When we vsay " the ox knoweth his 
owner," ^ we do not necessarily mean any particular 
ox ; but the use of the article throws into promi- 
nence the specific element giving character to all 
oxen. If we use the definite article to indicate 
some particular ox there must be something in the 
immediate connection to indicate the fact. The 
correctness of this view will be even more apparent 
Avhen, a little later,^ we shall consider the external 
evidence proving that the Jews in the time of 
Christ had as well-defined ideas of the character 
and limitations of the Old Testament as we have 
to-day. 

27. The references of the New Testament to 

1 Let the reader examine the following references: John ii. 
22; vii. 38, 42; x. 35; xix. 28; Acts viii. 32; Rom. iv. 3; ix. 17; 
X. 11; xi. 2; Gal. iii. 8, 22; iv. 30; 1 Tim. v. 18; 1 Peter ii. 6; 
2 Peter i. 20. 

2 Isa. i. 3. 

^ See Cha^Dter iv. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 43 

the Scriptures in the plural are also numerous, and 
are scarcely to be distinguished from those refer- 
ences which regard the whole collection in its unity. 
We read in Matthew : " Did ye never read in the 
Scriptures ? " ^ " Ye do err, not knowing the 
Scriptures, nor the power of God " ; 2 " How, then, 
should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must 
be?"^ "But all this is come to pass, that the 
Scriptures of the Prophets might be fulfilled " ; * 
where it is not the intention to intimate that some 
Scriptures were not of the Prophets, but rather 
that all the Scriptures were of prophetical origin. 
In Luke xxiv. 27 we are told that Christ, ^^ be- 
ginning from Moses and from all the Prophets, 
interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things 
concerning himself." In verses 44 and 45, in his 
parting w^ords with his disciples, Christ reaflSrms, 
that '* all things must needs be fulfilled, which are 
written in the Law of Moses, and the Prophets, 
and the Psalms, concerning me," where the ordinary 
Jewish threefold division of the Old Testament 
Scriptures is indicated, — the Psalms being the first 
and most important part of the third division. In 
John v; 39 Jesus tells his hearers, that they search 
the Scriptures, because they think that in them 
they have eternal life; and adds, that "these are 
they which bear witness of me." In Acts xvii. 

1 Matt. xxi. 42. 2 Matt. xxii. 29. 

3 Matt. xxvi. 54. ^ Matt. xxvi. 56. 



44 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

11 the Jews of Berea are said to be more noble 
than those of Thessalonica, because not only did 
they receive the word with all readiness of mind, 
but they examined the Scriptures daily, whether 
these things were so; and in xviii. 24, 28 we are 
told that Apollos Avas " mighty in the Scriptures," 
and that '^ he powerfully confuted the Jews [at 
Ephesus] , and that publicly, shewing by the Scrip- 
tures that Jesus was the Christ." In Eom. i. 2 
Paul refers to the gospel of God as something 
which God had "promised afore by his prophets in 
the Holy Scriptures." In Rom. xv. 4 we read : 
"For whatsoever things were written aforetime 
were written for our learning, that through patience 
and through comfort of the Scriptures we might 
have hope." 

In Eom. xvi. 26 occurs again the phrase " Scrip- 
tures of the Prophets " already remarked upon in 
Matt. xxvi. 56. In 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4 Paul declares, 
^^^"I delivered unto you first of all that which also I 
received, how that Christ died for our sins accord- 
ing to the Scriptures ; ^^^ and that he was buried ; 
and that he hath been raised on the third day ac- 
cording to the Scriptures." 

In 2 Peter iii. 16, as we have already remarked,^ 
Peter sets Paul's writings over against other Scrip- 
tures, and so classes them together. As also in 
all his Epistles, speaking in them of these things, 

1 Paragraph 18. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 45 

wherein some are ^^ hard to be understood, which 
the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as they do 
also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruc- 
tion." 

In glancing over this survey we perceive that by 
Christ and his apostles "everywhere and always 
the supreme authority of the sacred books is either 
directly asserted or conceded by implication. 
Scripture is the supreme arbiter, in all cases where 
a decision is required. The validity of the Re- 
deemer's mission, and his claims, are tried by it ; 
the doctrines ^vhich the apostles preached are tried 
by it ; every virtue either of morality or piety is 
sanctioned by it."^ 

28. From a simple inspection of these New 
Testament references, the scholar would of neces- 
sity conclude that there was a well-known and defi- 
nite collection of writings called ''the Scripture" 
or ''the Scriptures," written, indeed, by different 
persons, as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, 
Daniel ; but that they all spoke with an authority 
higher than belonged to them in their personal re- 
lations. For example, in the parable of the rich 
man and Lazarus it is affirmed that if one will not 
hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will he be per- 
suaded though one should rise from the dead.^ He 
would infer, also, that these writings were divided 

1 Stuart on the Old Testament, p. 330. 

2 i^uke xvi. 31. 



46 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE 

into portions,^ one of which wiis called the ^^ Law," 
and another the '' Prophets," and still another the 
''Psalms." 2 An(j on comparing these New Testa- 
ment references with the literature extant in the 
time of Christ, he could, with only a small margin 
of error, determine, independently of external 
evidence, what writings were in the Saviour's time 
regarded as of a sacred character. It would appear 
that all but five or six of the books contained in 
our present Hebrew Bibles are quoted by the writers 
of the New Testament ; and that no other writings 
are quoted in any such w^ay as to imply their equal 
authority. '' The New Testament writers could 
never have employed all these different appella- 
tions, and so often interchanged them without 
superadding any explanation, if the definite im- 
port of each and all had not been well understood 
by themselves and by those whom they addressed. 
The Old Testament must have been as definite then 
as it is now, and its limits as well knoAvn. Every 
Jew that could read must have known what books 
belonged to it, when copies of the Scriptures had 
be.come common."^ 

^ Matt. xi. 13; xxii. 40; Luke xvi. 16; John i. 45; Acts xiii. 
15; xxiv. 14; Rom. iii. 21. The same division is also indicated 
by the phrase " Moses and the Prophets " in Luke xvi. 29, 31 ; 
xxiv. 27; Acts XX viii. 23. ^' The Law, the Prophets, and the 
^Psalms,' " Luke xxiv. 44. 

2 The ordinary name among the Jews for the third division 
of their Scriptures w^as Hacjlographa, or Holy Writings, of 
whicli the Psalms were the first and principal division. 

3 Stuart on the Old Testament, pp. 255, 256. 



CLAIMED AKD ASSERTED. 47 

29. The confinement of the quotations by Christ 
and the apostles to the books contained in the Old 
Testament, cannot have arisen from the lack of 
other writings from which to quote. Jewish litera- 
ture extant in the time of Christ was abundant 
enough. There were the books still preserved in 
the Apocrjqiha (fourteen in number^) ; while in 
2 Esdr. xiv. 46 no less than seventy apocryphal 
books are distinguished from the twenty-four 
canonical of the Hebrew Scriptures. There was 
also a large amount of what is called ^^ apocalyptic" 
literature, prominent among which are the Book of 
Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, the Apocalypse of 
Baruch, the Psalms of Solomon, the Assumption 
of Moses, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Book of 
Jubilees, all of which were probably in circulation 
in apostolic times. In addition to these there was 
an accumulating mass of rabbinical traditions, 
which soon after grew into the twelve massive 
volumes of the Talmud, consisting of minute and 
extended commentaries upon the various precepts 
of the Old Testament. So extensive is this litera- 
ture that its neglect by Christ and the apostles 
cannot have been accidental. There is, indeed, 
a single reference in Jude (verse 14) to a passage 
in the Book of Enoch, as there are in Paul's writ- 

1 1 and 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Additions to Esther, Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus, Baruch with the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Song 
of the Three Children, the Story of Susanna, the Idol Bel and 
the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasses, and 1 and 2 Maccabees. 



48 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

ings two or three allusions to the literature of 
Greece ;^ but these are scarcely more than illustra- 
tions. 

30. Nor can the deference which Christ and 
the apostles paid to the Old Testament be accounted 
for on the so-called theory of accommodation, 
which implies that Christ humored the Jews of his 
time in their attachment to the Old Testament, for 
the sake of obtaining a favorable reception for the 
specific views which it was his main object to pro- 
mulgate. This course of accommodation might 
be allowable in case the opinions encountered were 
comparatively unimportant, and sustained no vital 
relation to the main doctrines presented. For 
example, in ascribing the creation of the world to 
God, it might not be necessary to correct the 
prevalent ideas, erroneous though they were, con- 
cerning the motions by which astronomical phenom- 
ena are produced, or concerning the secondary 
processes through which the facts of geology have 
been brought about. The method of creation In- 
divine power it may be impossible for finite beings 
ever to understand perfectly, and hence it Avill 
present for man a theme for endless study and a 
field for the perpetual enlargement of his knowl- 
edge. But the acknowledgment of God as Creator 
has a fundamental relation to all finite moral 
activity. Hence we need not expect to find in the 

1 Acts xvii. 28; Titiis i. 12. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 49 

allusions of the inspired records to natural objects 
the discriminations appropriate to modern science ; 
and, indeed, such discriminations are not to be 
found in the popular literature of our own day. 
With all the discoveries of modern science in our 
minds, we still use in our ordinary references to 
nature the language which describes it as it appears 
rather than such as expresses the obscure and 
hidden realities which modern science has proved 
to exist. We still speak of the -^rising" and 
" setting " of the sun, the '^ waxing " and ^^ waning" 
of the moon, as if ignorant of the facts of as- 
tronomy. But the references of Christ and the 
apostles to the Old Testament are of an entirely 
different character. The completion of the Old 
Testament in the New is a vital part of the New 
Testament itself. The types and prophecies of 
the Old Testament fulfilled in Christ are es- 
sential elements in defining to us Christ's nature 
and work. Furthermore, Christ in the most fear- 
less manner set himself against various false views 
prevalent in his time concerning the Old Testa- 
ment, and made a sharp distinction between the 
precepts of the law itself and the false interpreta- 
tions which had become current in his time. The 
Sermon on the Mount is throughout a protest 
against current traditional misconceptions of the 
law, and Jesus did ?^ot hesitate on repeated occa- 
sions to enforce the spirituality of the law of the 



50 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE 

Sabbath against the rabbinical interpretations of 
his day. Indeed, the whole New Testament, with 
its abundant and exckisive references to the Old 
Testament as of divine authority, is a protest 
against its acceptance in the narrow and literal 
sense in which the Jewish teachers of the time re- 
garded it. We cannot therefore explain away, 
on the theory of accommodation, the apparent en- 
dorsement of the Old Testament by the winters of 
the New. 

31. The repeated, emphatic, and exclusive 
appeal by the New Testament writers to the Old 
Testament Scriptures as when properly understood 
of divine authority, is the more impressive when 
w^e consider the manner in w^hich the Old Testa- 
ment writers both assume and assert their own 
divine commission. In numberless instances the 
writers of the Old Testament assume to speak in 
the name of the Lord. Moses expressly records 
that Avhen he returned to be the leader of his people 
he did so hy positive divine command, God saying 
to him, ''Now therefore go, and I will be with thy 
mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt sa}'.'*^ 
Again, in Num. xvi. 28, Moses invokes a miracle, 
that the people might know that the Lord had sent 
him to do all these w^orks, "for / have not done 
them of mine own mind.*' In Ex. xxxiv. 16 
there is a command of God recoi'ded forbidding in- 

1 Ex. iv. 12. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 51 

termarriage between the Israelites and the natives 
of Palestine. In Ezra ix. 1-4 there is record of a 
notorious breach of this command, and the author 
regards the transgression not merely as in defiance 
of the authority of Moses, but as in defiance of the 
" words of the God of Israel." Throughout the 
Pentateuch such phrases as " The Lord said unto 
Moses " ; " These are the words which the Lord 
hath commanded " ; '' As the Lord commanded 
Moses"; "And the Lord called unto Moses, and 
spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation, saying"; "This is it that the Lord 
spake, saying"; are too numerous to mention, — 
so numerous, indeed, that familiarity has caused 
them to lose much of their force. Nehemiah also 
speaks of "the book of the law of Moses, which 
the Lord had commanded to Israel."^ The last 
words of David are introduced by the words, 
" The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his 
word luas in my tongue." ^ In describing the vision 
Avhich he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, 
the opening words of the" prophet Isaiah are, 
" Hear, O heavens ; and give ear, O earth ; for the 
Lord hath spoken " ; ^ and Jeremiah introduces his 
prophecy with the phrase, "Then the word of the 
Lord came unto me, saying."^ "Thus the com- 
monly used language in reference to their own 

1 Keh. viii. 1. 2 2 Sam. xxiii. 2. 

3 Isa. i. 2. 4 jei-, j. 4 



52 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE 

statements is : ' The mouth of the Lord hath 
spoken ' ; ^ Thus saith the Lord ' ; ^ Hear the word 
of the Lord.' And in numberless cases in the Old 
Testament prophets we find such expressions as 
these : ' The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw 
concerning Judah and Jerusalem'; ^ The word that 
came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying' ; 'The 
word of the Lord came expressly to Ezekiel ' ; 
'The beginning of the word of the Lord by 
Hosea ' ; ' Now the word of the Lord came unto 
Jonah the son of Amittai, saying'; 'The word of 
the Lord that came unto Micah ' ; ' The book of the 
vision of Nahum ' ; ' The burden which Habakkuk 
the prophet did see ' ; ' The word of the Lord 
which came unto Zephaniah ' ; 'In the fii-st day of 
the month came the word of the Lord by Haggai 
the prophet ' ; ' In the eighth month came the word 
of the Lord unto Zechariah ' ; ' The burden of the 
word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi.'''^ 

The present state of our inquiry is this : We 
have seen, first, that the supernatural is so prom- 
inent in the main facts of Christianity that it 
ought to occasion no surprise to find it extend- 
ing so as to guarantee the record of these facts ; ^ 
secondly, that the promises of Christ that super- 
natural aid would be granted to the apostles to 
insure accuracy of memory and correctness in 

1 Baimerman on Inspiration, p. 310. ^ <^qq Chapter i. 



CLAIMED AND ASSERTED. 53 

foretelling future events, are explicit, and are con- 
firmed by miraculous gifts ; ^ and thirdly, that the 
apostles claimed to speak by the authority of the 
Holy Spirit, and that both they and the Saviour 
himself attest in superabundant measure the divine 
authority of the Old Testament. This they do (a) 
by directly adopting the views current at the time 
as to the sacredness of the Old Testament Scrip- 
ture ; (6) by repeatedly making various portions 
of it their final appeal in argument ; (c) by direct 
assertions that portions, at least, of the Scripture 
were the direct word of God, or were spoken by 
the Holy Spirit ; {d) by refraining from attempts 
to correct or criticise any portion of the Scripture 
then held sacred, though freely criticising the 
traditional views of their times. This establishes 
the divine authority of the Old Testament. To 
establish the authority of the books of the New 
Testament we have to prove that they were either 
written or endorsed by apostles, or, at any rate, 
that they correctly represent apostolic teachings 
and originated in apostolic times. They then 
become invested with the authority of the apostolic 
commission. A suiBcient proof of such investiture 
of authority is that they were so received by the 
primitive church, who knew both the apostles and 
their doctrines, and who with the standard of Old 
Testament authority before them exalted the New 
^ See Chap. ii. 



54 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Testament to a co-ordinate place with the Old. 
But we are anticipating the results of a succeeding 
chapter. 

It will now be in place to consider the important 
and somewhat difficult question, What books con- 
stitute the inspired record? a department of in- 
quiry comprehended in the technical name of 
Canonics, 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 55 



lY. 

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 

32. The technical words canon and canonical 
are so convenient that we cannot well avoid their 
use. The word canon, originally a carpenter's 
rule, is used in an active and a passive sense, 
Actively considered it is a rule according to which 
something is regulated ;. passively, it is that which 
is determined by the application of a rule. When 
applied to the Bible the noun is used in a passive 
sense, and indicates those books which have stood 
the tests applied by the early church to determine 
their authenticity and inspiration. When so re- 
ceived, the book becomes a part of the rule of faith 
in the active sense, that is, it becomes a positive 
and authoritative element in determinino^ our 
standards of doctrine. Hence it is a matter of no 
small importance to determine the exact limits of 
the sacred canon. Nor is the task wholl}^ free 
from difficulty. 

33. There are a few books of the Old Testament 
to which no distinct reference is made by the 
writers of the New, among which are Esther, Ezra, 
Nehemiah, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. 



56 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

These however, we accept, as a part of the Old 
Testament, because of the evidence we have that 
at the beginning of our era they formed an integral 
portion of the Sacred Scriptures, and so received 
the endorsement of the general references of Christ 
and his apostles to the Old Testament as a whole. 
That the Sacred Scriptures to which Christ and his 
apostles refer, included the books just mentioned, 
and did not include the Apocrypha, is evident from 
a variety of considerations. 

In Luke xxiv. 44 Christ refers to the Scriptures 
under the apparently well-known threefold division 
of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. "In 
the twenty-seventh verse of the same chapter it is 
said of Jesus, that ' beginning from Moses and from 
the Prophets, he explained to them [his disciples] 
in all the Scriptures the things which concerned 
himself.' This passage is virtually the same with 
that above. Two divisions of Scripture are here 
alluded to by name, and the third is separated from 
them by a phraseology which necessarily imports 
that there were other portions of Scripture besides 
the two named, which Jesus interpreted for the 
disciples, as he first had done in respect to the Law 
and the Prophets. . . . That the Scriptures in a 
specific form are here meant, there can be no 
doubt ; for after speaking of the things written in 
the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, concern- 
ing Christ, it is said of iTesus, that ' he opened the 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 



57 



mind [of the disciples] to understand Jug ygacpag^ 
the Scriptures'; viz. those Scriptures which he 
had quoted and explained."^ The arrangement of 
the books in the Hebrew Bible is as follows : ^ 



I. The Law 



IL The Prophets, 



Former 



Latter 



Major 



Minor 



Genesis. 

Exodus. 

Leviticus. 

Numbers. 

Deuteronomy. 

Joshua. 

Judges. 

1 and 2 Samuel. 

1 and 2 Kings. 

r Isaiah. 
\ Jeremiah. 
[ Ezekiel. 

Tlie twelve minor 
Prophets. 



III. The Writings, 



r Psalms. 
\ Proverbs. 
[Job. 

The Song of Songs. 

Ruth. 

Lamentations. 

Ecclesiastes. 

Esther. 

Daniel. 

Ezra. 

Nehemiah. 

1 and 2 Chronicles. 



In Matt, xxiii. 35 Christ refers to " the righteous 
blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel 
the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah, son of 

1 Stuart on the Old Testament, pp. 249, 250. 

2 See article Bible in Smith's Bible Dictionary. 



58 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctu- 
ary and the altar " ; which are the first and last 
martyrs in that section of history of which we 
have an account in the Hebrew Scriptures ; the 
last book in the Hebrew Scriptures being Second 
Chronicles, and the murder of Zachariah being re- 
counted near the close of that book. The sio-nifi- 

o 

cance of this reference appears at a glance upon 
the preceding table. 

34. The threefold division mentioned in para- 
graph 33, and appearing in the above table, is 
first referred to about the middle of the second 
century b. c, when the translator of the apocry- 
phal Book of Ecclesiasticus, otherwise called 
the Wisdom of Sirach, introduces his work by 
speaking of the devotion of his grandfather (the 
author of the book) to the reading of ^' the Law, 
and the Prophets, and the other books of our 
fathers " ; and twice more in a short space this 
same author mentions the threefold division : once, 
as "the Law, and the Prophets, and the other 
[books] which follow after them"; and again, as 
"the Law, the Prophecies, and the rest of the 
boohs^'' where it is very evident, from the use of 
the article, that ''the books," like our phrase ''the 
Scriptures," does not mean books in general, but a 
specific and well-understood class of books of the 
same character with the Law and the Prophets. 
There is no sufficient ground for Dr. Ladd's asser- 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 59 

tion that these titles of the third division given in 
the preface to Ecclesiasticus are less respectful 
than the other two ; nor for the assertion that this 
apocryphal book '^ itself makes pretensions to pro- 
phetic and canonical significance." ^ Ecclesiasticus 
xxiv. 33 does indeed read, "I will yet pour out 
teaching as prophecy, and leave it to everlasting 
generations"; but, as the connection shows, the 
writer does not represent himself, but rather 
Wisdom (who is personified through the whole 
chapter) , as the one who is to do this. 

35. The testimony of various other books of 
the Apocrypha to the superior value of the writings 
included in our present Old Testament is likewise 
important. The books of the Apocrypha (which 
we have already enumerated y were written sub- 
sequent to the time of Malachi (not far from 
430 B. c), and obtained currency in connection 
with the circulation of the Greek translation of the 
Old Testament called the "Septuagint." These 
apocryphal books number, as already said, fourteen. 
They make no distinct claims to divine authority. 
There is no certain evidence that any of them were 
quoted by Christ and his apostles. Neither of 
these facts, however, is absolutely decisive against 
their canonical authority, since the same is true of 

^ See Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, by George T. Ladd, D.D., 
Vol. I. p. 651. 

2 See paragraph 31, p. 50. 



60 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

some of the books of the Old Testament, just 
mentioned; still, this absence of both the claim 
and recognition of divine authority is an important 
consideration when combined with certain other 
facts now to be mentioned. 

The distinct testimony of the Apocrypha to the 
specially sacred character of the Old Testament is 
thus summarized by a most competent scholar : ^ 
"A peculiar authority is imputed in the Apocrypha 
to the canonical writings. They are held to be 
distinct from all other books, and given of God 
for human guidance, through prophets inspired for 
the purpose. They are called 'holy books,' ^ and 
their writers are represented to have been under 
the influence of the Holy Spirit.^ It is distinctly 
said of Jeremiah in one place, that he was a 
prophet 'sanctified from the mother's womb.'^ So 
in Baruch a passage is cited from this prophet with 
this formula, 'Thus saith the Lord.'^ The com- 
mon division of the Scriptures into Law and 
Prophets, too, shows that the authors of the several 
canonical books were looked upon as prophets, 
that is, as inspired men.^ And what was true of 
the canonical books, in general, had special force as 

1 Prof. E. C. Bissell, Commentary on the Apocrypha, p. 44. 

2 1 Mace. xii. 9. 

8 1 Esd. i. 28; vi. 1; Ecclus. xlviii. 24. 

* Ecchis. xlix. 7. 

s Bar. ii. 21. 

^ Cf. Jos., Contra Ap., i. 7. 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 61 

applied to the five books of Moses. No epithets 
were thought extravagant, no praise too high to 
be bestowed on him, the greatest of the prophets, 
and his divinely prompted, divinely acknowledged 
work. He was like the o'lorious an«:els and be- 
loved of God and men.^ The Mosaic code was 
the law of the Highest,^ holy and God-given.^ It 
was the sum total of all wisdom. ' All these 
things,' said the son of Sirach, 'are [true of] the 
Book of the Covenant of the most high God, the 
law which Moses commanded for an heritage to the 
cono;re2:ations of Jacob. It mves fulness of wis- 
dom as Pison, and as Tigris in the time of the 
new fruits. It maketh the understanding to 
abound like Euphrates, and as Jordan in the time 
of harvest. It maketh the doctrine of knowledge 
appear as the light and as Gihon [i.e. the Nile] in 
the time of vintao-e.' " * 

36. The testimony of Josephus is even more 
explicit than that of the Apocrypha. And after 
making all the abatement possible, Josephus re- 
mains, when speaking of the customs and beliefs 
of the Jews of his time, a witness of the very 
highest authority. His father was a distinguished 
priest, and he himself received the best education 
of his people and time. At the age of nineteen 
he joined the sect of the Pharisees. His treatise 

1 Ecclus. xlix. 2. "^ Ecclus. xlix. 4. 

^ 2 Mace. vi. 23. * Ecclus. xxiv. 23-27. 



62 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

against Apion was written in defence of his own 
religion against a violent attack made upon it by 
that celebrated grammarian of Alexandria. In 
this work Josephus says : 

^^ For we [the Jews] have not an innumerable 
multitude of books anion o; us, disaoreeino^ from 
and contradicting one another [as the Greeks have] , 
but 'only twenty-two books, which contain the 
records of all the past times ; which are justly be- 
lieved to be divine ; and of them five belong to 
Moses, which contain his hnvs and the traditions of 
the origin of mankind till his death. This interval 
of time was little short of three thousand years ; 
but as to the time from the death of Moses till the 
reign of Artaxerxes [the time of Nehemiah and 
Malachi] , king of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, 
the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote dowai 
what was done in their times in thirteen books. 
The remaining four books contain hymns to God 
and precepts for the conduct of human life. It is 
true, our history hath been- written since Arta- 
xerxes very particularly [referring to the Apocry- 
pha], but hath not been esteemed of the like 
authorit}^ with the former by our forefathers, be- 
cause there hath not been an exact succession of 
prophets since that time ; and how firmly we have 
given credit to those books of our own nation, is 
evident by what we do ; for during so many ages 
as have already passed, no one has been so bold as 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 63 

either to add anything to them, to take anything 
from them, or to make any change in them."^ 

To this testimony of Josephus, as already in- 
timated, it may be objected, that he is not alto- 
gether a veracious writer, and that in preparing 
his own histories he himself used undue freedom 
with the same collections of writings which in 
this quotation he so highly extols. This incon- 
sistences however, can easily be accounted for, 
from the character and situation of the man, with- 
out throwing any discredit upon the present testi- 
mony to the esteem in which the Old Testament 
was held by the Jews of his time. The motives 
which led him in his historical works to jumble 
fact and fancy together, were not present in in- 
troducing such a reference to the belief of his 
fellow-countrymen concerning the Scripture as is 
here offered in evidence against Apion. 

The reader miHit at first stumble over the 
fact that Josephus reckons the sacred books of the 
Jews as only twenty-two in number. This, how- 
ever, conforms to the enumeration applied to the 
Jewish sacred books at the time, making the num- 
ber agree with that of the letters in the Hebrew 
alphabet. 2 To bring about this conformity. First 
and Second Samuel, First and Second Kings, First 
and Second Chronicles are each reckoned as one 

1 Contra Apionem, i. 8. 

2 Cf. the subdivisions of Ps. cxix. 



64 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

book; as also are Judges and Ruth, Ezra and 
Nehemiah, Jeremiah and his Lamentations, and 
the twelve minor Prophets. Josephus's testimony 
to the number of books regarded b}^ the Jews as 
sacred is all the more weighty because in his his- 
tories he freely uses other literature, especially the 
apocryphal books, which in his treatise Against 
Apion he expressly excludes from the list of in- 
spired writings. 

37. The testimony of Philo JuDiEus, a learned 
Jew^ of Alexandria who wrote extensively about 
the be£j:innino: of the Christian era, confirms that 
of Josephus. While Philo does not give a cata- 
loo:ue of the books reo:arded as sacred bv his con- 
temporaries, he quotes, as books of divine origin, 
the Pentateuch, Joshua, First Samuel, Ezra, Isaiah, 
Jeremiah, Hosea, Zechariah, the Psalms, and the 
Proverbs, and makes a casual reference to Judges, 
Job, and First Kings, ^ but "from the Apocrypha 
he makes no excerpts or citation, not giving it 
the honor he accords to Plato, Hippocrates, and 
several other Greek Avriters."^ 

38. In the year 179 a. d., Melito, bishop of 
Sardis, travelled extensively throughout the East, 
and procured for a friend '^ an exact statement of the 
Old Testament, how many in number, and in what 

1 Home's Introduction, Yol. I. p. 42. 

2 Scliaff-IIerzog Encyclopaedia of Religious Knowledge, article 
Canon, Yol. I. p. 386. 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 65 

order the books were written."^ His list agrees 
exactly with our present Old Testament, except 
tliat Nehemiah and Esther are w^anting. Westcott, 
however, thinks the}^ were probably included in the 
general title, "Esdras." A little later the learned 
Origen prepared a similar list, enumerating the 
twenty-two books which the Hebrews hand down 
as included in the Old Testament. The fragment 
of Origen in which this is preserved, is doubtless 
somewhat imperfect, which may account for his 
omission of the twelve minor Prophets and his 
addition of the Epistle of Jeremiah. Orio;en ex- 
pressly excludes the Maccabees from the canon. ^ 

39. A little later still, Jerome, the greatest 
scholar of his age, and the reviser of the Latin 
translation of the Bible, gives a list of the canonical 
books of the Old Testament, agreeing exactly with 
that now received by Protestants, ^^ adding that 
whatever is out of the number of these must be 
placed in the Apocrypha."^ The Talmud, which 
represents the continuous Jewish tradition, gives 
the same list. 

40. That there should be an occasional quota- 
tion from the Apocrypha by the early church 
fathers is not surprising when we remember that 
in the Septuagint (the Greek translation so ex- 

1 Eusebius, Church History, iv. 26. 

2 Ibid., vi. 25. 

^ Prologue to Galatians. 



66 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

tensively used about the beginning of our era), 
the canonical and tlie uncanonical books were pub- 
lished together in the same volume ; as they are in 
many Bibles of the present, even when the difler- 
ence between them is distinctly recognized. But 
even so, it Avas not till the close of the second cen- 
tury that any citations were made by the church 
fathers from the Apocrypha which would seem to 
imply its canonical character ; and even then it 
would appear that they acknowledged it inadver- 
tently, ^^ with no intention of giving them [the 
apocryphal books]- a theological significance and 
endorsement which should be valid for subsequent 
times." ^ In proportion to its size the Apocrypha 
Avas quoted far less frequently than the canonical 
Scriptures. The supposed citations from the Apoc- 
rypha in the recently discovered Teaching of the 
Apostles (^Jidaxri libi^ 'Jnoawlu)^) are uo cxccptiou, 
even though its date be assigned to the early part 
of the second century. With one exception the 
correspondences are of the vaguest kind, and do 
not compare at all with the distinct and numerous 
references of the New Testament to the Old. 

41. The judgment of sound scholarship upon 
this subject is well expressed by the eminent 
student of the Apociypha from whom we have just 
quoted. After remarking that until the Council 
of Trent not even the Roman Catholic church had 

1 Bissell on the Apocrypha, p. 51. 



THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 67 

given the Apocrypha authoritative recognition, 
and that it '^ was the criticisms of Protestants, par- 
ticularly of Erasmus and Luther, on the loose 
practice of Komanists respecting the Bible, that 
led to a consideration of the subject at this time," ^ 
he adds : "It is obvious that this important step 
was taken by the Council of Trent for other than 
simple historical reasons. Without doubt one of 
these was to emphasize, as much as possible, the 
differences existing between themselves and the 
Protestants as represented by their two great 
leaders, Erasmus and Luther. In feet, this pur- 
pose was openly announced by Cardinal Polus. 
Another reason is to be found in the weighty cir- 
cumstance that the apocryphal books might be 
found very useful, if not, indeed, absolutely essen- 
tial, in defending certain peculiar dogmas of the 
Eomish church, as, for instance, that of the inter- 
cession of angels,*^ and of departed saints,^ of the 
merit of good works, ^ its teaching concerning 
purgatory, and the desirability that the living pray 
for the dead.^ Tanner candidly acknowledges, 
indeed, that the Apocrypha were pronounced 
canonical because the ' church found its own spirit 
in these books.' Still further, it was a matter of 
no little interest to maintain at all hazards the 

1 Apocrypha, pp. 52, 53. * Tob. iv. 7; Ecclus. iii. 30. 

2 Tob. xii. 12. 5 2 Mace. xii. 42 ff. 

3 2 Mace. XV. 14; cf. Bar. iii. 4. 



08 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

dignity of the Vulgate, and this would have been 
greatly imperilled if, on the authority of a general 
council, so large a part of it as was contained in 
the Old Testament Apocrypha was declared to be 
of inferior value. But if none of these reasons 
considered separately, or Avhen taken together, 
could be regarded as sufficient to determine the 
action of the council with reference to the Scrip- 
tures, there is another whose weis^ht cannot be 
disputed. It is the principle that then dominated, 
and must ever dominate in such a system as the 
Eomish church represents, namely, that there are 
no distinct periods of divine revelation, but that 
it is an uninterrupted process going forward in and 
through the church. ^When, therefore, the 
Catholic church insists with special emphasis on 
the full and equal canonicity of the Apocrypha, its 
interest in them, before all, declares itself for the 
reason that by their means the gaps in the inspired 
literature are filled up and that continuity 
[^Solida^itdt] of canonical development restored, 
which, in turn, forms the innermost idea of the 
dogma of tradition.' " ^ 

1 Bissell on the Apocrypha, p. 54. 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 69 



V. 

THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 

42. At first thought it is a puzzling fact that 
the canon of Sacred Scripture was not determined 
for the church, once for all, by the formal act of 
any authoritative ecclesiastical body. The Bible 
was of gradual growth. The supernatural history 
of Israel, of which the Old Testament is a product, 
closed four centuries before the Christian era ; and 
it is acknowledged on all hands that from that 
time to the birth of Christ there were no prophets 
in Israel. And more and more the people were 
learning to prize their sacred history, when about 
two Inmdred years before the beginning of our 
era the fearful persecutions of Antiochus Epipha- 
nes brought out this latent judgment of the church 
into those definite forms of testimony which we 
have been considering. A similar persecution of 
the Christian church under Diocletian (beginning 
about A. D. 304) brought out into definite and 
convincing shape the evidence respecting the New 
Testament canon. Under this emperor it was 
enacted (a. d. 303), among other things, that 



70 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

"the bishops and presbyters should deliver all 
their sacred books into the hands of the magis- 
trates ; who were commanded, under the severest 
penalties, to burn them in a public and solemn 
manner."^ A long-continued and ferocious period 
of persecution followed.^ All who delivered up 
their copies of Scripture to destruction were ex- 
communicated from the church.^ At a later time 
" the question of the readmission of these traitors 
(traditores), as they were emphatically called, 
created a schism in the church." ^ Many, how- 
ever, deceived the government by palming off' the 
writings of heretics upon the officers. Such were 
afterwards terribly maltreated by the pagans. 

The catalogue of the New Testament pre- 
pared soon after this by Eusebius,^ reckons as 
canonical beyond dispute the four Gospels, the 
Acts, fourteen Epistles of Paul (which would in- 
clude Hebrews), First Epistle of John, the First 
of Peter, and ^Mf proper" the Revelation of John. 
Among disputed l)ooks at that time Eusebius 
reckons James, Jude, Second Epistle of Peter, the 
Second and Third of John, and distinctly pro- 
nounces all others spurious. Other private cata- 

1 Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Koman Empire, Chap. 
XV i. 

2 For particulars, see Eusebius' s Church History, Book viii. 
^ Eusebius' Church History and Lactantius' Institutes. 

* Westcott in Smith's Bible Dictionary, article Canon. 
^ Church History, iii. 25, 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 7l 

logues were prepared during this century by 
Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine, each of whom 
reckons all the books of the New Testament as 
canonical ; and after the close of the fourth century 
there is practical unanimity upon the subject. 

43. Interest, however, concentrates upon the 
evidence borne concerning the canonical authority 
of the books of the New Testament during the sec- 
ond and third centuries, — a period in such close 
proximity to the apostolic age that its history is of 
pre-eminent value in every department of Christian 
evidences.^ The apostle John was alive near the 
close of the first century. The contemporaries of 
John, some of whom received personal instruction 
from ^^ the beloved disciple," were the teachers of 
the great defenders of the Christian faith whose 
names are prominent about the close of the second 
century. The various testimonies adduced from 
this period concerning the canonical authority of 
the individual books of the New Testament, receive 
weight from several considerations : a. It is the 
testimony not of individuals, but of the common 
consent of great numbers of Christian believers. 
The writers speak for their class, h. Much of the 
evidence is incidental, so as to exclude the theory 
of its being manufactured. It is the appeal of 
writers, both for and against Christianity, to 
authorities which no one thought of disputing. 

^ See the author's Logic of Christian Evidences, p. 229 sq. 



72 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

c. The testimony is widely distributed, and is that 
of Christian communities in France, in Italy, in 
Northern Africa, in Egypt, in Asia Minor, and 
Mesopotamia, — a testimony as widespread as the 
Eoman empire. From Lyons in France to Edessa 
in Mesopotamia, the distance in a straight line is 
twenty-five hundred miles ; and Alexandria is 
fourteen hundred miles from Carthage, and a 
thousand miles from Edessa. Communication was 
then extremely slow and difficult. The Christian 
communities spoke different languages, and their 
outward circumstances were as diverse as can well 
be imagined. These facts combined give irresisti- 
ble force to the testimony of the period under 
consideration concerning the early records of 
Christianity. It is evident at a glance that the 
testimonies of the different bodies of Christians 
scattered over this wide area, would not each be 
equally clear concerning every portion of Sacred 
Scripture. 

44. The proper witnesses to the canonical 
authorit}^ of the books of the New Testament, are 
the Christian communities to whom they were first 
addressed, and among whom they were first cir- 
culated. The whole condition and experience of 
these early communities fitted them to pass judg- 
ment upon the internal marks of apostolic autlior- 
ship. These communities were under the pressure 
of every conceivable motive to be on their guard 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 73 

against imposition. They knew the signature and 
style of the apostles and their companions, and 
were familiar at first hand with the whole circle 
of apostolic doctrines. Furthermore, if we believe 
in a Providence at all, it would seem clear that 
God, who cares for the sparrow's fall and numbers 
the hairs of our head, would not leave without 
adequate record and witness the expensive revela- 
tion made through the incarnation and death of his 
Son. 

45. What now are the facts concerning the 
books of the New Testament as they emerge to 
historical recognition about the close of the second 
and the beginning of the third century? a, A 
translation of the writings upon which the faith of 
the church was founded, was made into the Syriac 
language some time during the second century, 
and was in authoritative circulation in the valley of 
the Euphrates. This translation contains all of 
our present New Testament except Jude, Second 
Peter, Second and Third John, and the Revelation, 
and no other books. 

b. About the same time translations appear in 
the Latin, and are in circulation in Northern Africa 
and Italy. A catalogue of New Testament books 
known as the Muratorian Canon, prepared about 
the year 170, has been preserved, and well repre- 
sents the limits assio'ned to the sacred writinofs bv 
the churches in Northern Africa and Italy. This 



74 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

catalogue includes the four Gospels, Acts, the 
thirteen Epistles of Paul, First and Second John, 
Jude, and Revelation. Combining these two cata- 
logues, we have distinct documentary evidence of 
the canonical recognition by the churches of the 
second century of every book of the New Testa- 
ment except Second Peter. 

c. The great commentators and writers whose 
labors begin at this period, make constant appeals 
to the sacred writings which embody the facts and 
doctrines of Christianity. The quotations of these 
great apologists and commentators from individual 
books incidentally show that they received as 
canonical, and as of equal value with the Old 
Testament, nearly every l)ook now included in the 
New Testament ; but as to a few books the manner 
of quotation is indecisive. The quotations from 
the books enumerated in the catalogues just pre- 
sented^ (and in which they agree) are so numerous, 
and the references to them on all hands are so 
explicit and definite, that we need not accumulate 
the testimony. There is no reasonal)le question 
touching the canonicity of the four Gospels, Acts, 
Paul's Epistles, First Peter, and First John. 

d. There are, however, seven books of the 
present canon to which the universal consent of 
Christian l)elievers had not been explicitly obtained 
at the close of the second century. These books 

^ Paragraplis 43 and 45 6. 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 75 

are Hebrews, Jude, James, Second and Third 
John, Second Peter, and the Kevelation. Besides 
these, there are four works of early writers which 
were treated vvitli a good deal of consideration 
during the second and third centuries, but which 
were never received as canonical. Tliese are the 
Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the 
Epistle of Clement, and the Apocalypse of Peter. 
We will give the testimony concerning these in 
detail. 

4(5. The evidence in favor of the Epistle to 
THE Hebrews is as follows : a. It was included 
in the Syriac Version, referred to in paragraph 
45. This version contained no other disputed 
book. 

h. The teachers in the catechetical school of 
Alexandria without exception received it as canon- 
ical, though expressing doubts as to its authorship. 
The weight of this testimony will appear upon 
noticing that at that period Alexandria was the 
centre of the Greek-speaking Jews, and that 
Pant.i^:nus, who ascribed tlie Epistle to Paul, was 
at the head of the catechetical school of Alexandria 
about the year 150, and c. that his pupil Clem- 
ent of ALEXANimiA (al)out 200), avIio succeeded 
Pantix^nus in the school, unhesitatingly acknowl- 
edges the canonical authority of the book and its 
relations to Paul as author ; accounting for its 
peculiarities of style on the tlieory that Ijuke had 



76 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

translated it from Hebrew.^ d. A little later 
Origen, who had been a pupil of both Pantaenus 
and Clement, became an instructor in this cate- 
chetical school of Alexandria. He frequently 
quotes the Book of Hebrews,^ as a genuine Epistle 
of Paul ; and though at times he expresses doubt 
as to its authorship, he never questions its canoni- 
cal authority. It should be observed that the 
recognition of Hebrews here adduced, is from that 
portion of the church best competent to decide 
upon its authenticity. On the other hand, in the 
Western- churches there is a lack of evidence sup- 
porting the claims of Hebrews to canonical author- 
it^^ The Muratorian Canon ^ (a.d. 170) did not 
originally contain it. Tertullian (a.d. 220) 
acknoAvledges the Epistle as of great authority, 
and ascribes it to Barnabas. Iren^us, bishop of 
Lyons, France (about a.d. 175), rarel^^ if ever, 
refers to the Epistle. All this, however, is nega- 
tive evidence, and can be accounted for by the dis- 
tance separating the churches where these writers 
lived from the region where the Epistle was tirst 
circulated, or from the difficulty wdiich Latin Chris- 
tians would have in appreciating thoughts clothed 
in such exclusive Jewish dress as we find in the 
Book of Hebrews. The hesitation of the Western 
churches respecting the Book of Hel)rews reveals, 

1 Eusebius, Cliurch History, vi. 14. 

2 Ibid., vi. 25. ^ Paragraph 45 6. 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 77 

however, the ordinary caution upon which the early 
believers acted. 

47. The Epistle of Jude is included in the 
Muratorian Canon (170), though doubts are ex- 
pressed as to whether Jude were the author. 
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and TertuUian 
recognized it as canonical, though in one place 
Origen alludes to a doubt. On the other hand, it 
is absent in the Syriac Version, and there is no 
trace of it in the ^' Asiatic churches up to the com- 
mencement of the fourth century." 

48. The Epistle of James is found in the 
Syriac Version, and, according to Eusebius, was 
publicly read in most of the churches as genuine 
at the beginning of the fourth century ; ^ and is 
quoted as canonical " by almost all the fiithers of 
the fourth century." On the other hand, it is 
absent from the Muratorian Canon, and is but in- 
distinctly referred to by Irenseus. 

Jude describes himself as the brother of James. 
It is doubtful whether they were apostles, or the 
brothers of Christ mentioned in Matt. xiii. 55, who 
were of course companions of the apostles, and one 
of whom was pastor of the church at Jerusalem.^ 

49. The Second and TiiiiiD Epistles of John 
are so short that it is not surprising to find less 
evidence respecting them than respecting the longer 
and more characteristic portions. But, according 

1 Church Hist., ii. 23. 2 ^^ts xv. 13. 



78 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

to Westcott, "they were included in the Old 
Latm Version [in existence during the second 
century]. Clement of Alexandria wrote short 
notes upon them. Irenaeus quotes the Second 
Epistle as St. eJohn's."^ These Epistles also closely 
resemble the First Epistle in their language. 

50. The Second Epistle of Peter. The 
amount of direct evidence to substantiate the canon- 
ical authority of this Epistle is less than that of any 
other portion of Scripture. There is no distinct 
evidence of its having' ^^ been referred to bv any 
author earlier than Origen" (about 220) ; though 
Clement of Alexandria is reported by the church 
historians Eusebius and Photius to have written a 
" commentary upon all the disputed Epistles, in 
which this was certainly included." In the fourth 
century Did^^mus, a celebrated writer of Alex- 
andria, refers frequentlj^ to the Epistle. We may 
safely adopt the words of Canon Cook concerning 
it : " The historical evidence is certainly incon- 
clusive, but not such as to require or to warrant 
the rejection of the Epistle. The silence of the 
fathers is accounted for more easily than its admis- 
sion into the canon after the question as to its 
genuineness had been raised. It is not conceivable 
that it should have been received without positive 
attestation from the churches to which it was first 
addressed. We know that the autographs of 

1 Epistles of St. John, Introduction, p. liv. 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 79 

apostolic writings were preserved with care. It 
must also be observ^ed that all motive for forgery is 
absent. This Epistle does not support any hierar- 
chical pretensions, nor does it bear upon any con- 
troversies of a later ao-e." ^ If Second Peter is not 
genuine it is a bare forgery ; for it professes to 
come from Peter, " an apostle of Jesus Christ,"^ 
and to be a "second Epistle."^ 

51. The Revelation of John claims to have 
been written by the apostle of that name ; * for, 
though there may have been many bearing the name 
of John, there could have been but one who could 
describes himself as the " servant John, who bare 
witness of the word of God, and of the testimony 
of Jesus Christ, even of all things that he saw,"^ 
and who could at that time, in Asia, where the 
apostle was so well known, assume the authori- 
tative tone pervading the book. It could not have 
been an easy matter for such a book as Revelation 
to have been so generally received, as it was early 
in the second century, as a product of the apostle 
John unless it claimed to be genuine, and unless 
that claim could be well supported. Yet we find 
that Justin Martyr, who was born about the time 
of the death of John, and suffered martyrdom 
about 165, distinctly ascribes the book to the apos- 

1 Smith's Bible Diet., artiele Peter. 

2 i. 1. 3 iii, 1. 4 Chap. i. 1-9; xxii. 8, 9. 
6 Cf. John i. 14; xix. 35; 1 John i. 2. 



80 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

tie John, as does the Muratorian Canon; while 
Irenaeus (about 175) often quotes the book as the 
Avork of John, as does Clement of Alexandria 
(200) ; and Origen (220) expressly says the apos- 
tle John wrote the Revelation. The arguments 
against its apostolic origin are chiefly drawn : a. 
from the doubts expressed upon the point hy Dio- 
NYSius,^ a bishop of Alexandria (about 240) ; b, 
from its not being found in the Syriac Version, 
and c. from the character and literary st3de of its 
contents. Indeed, it was this last consideration 
which seemed to have induced the doubts expressed 
by Dionysius. " Jerome states that the Greek 
churches felt with respect to the Revelation a sim- 
ilar doubt to that of the Latins respecting the Epistle 
to the Hebrews."'^ The positive testimony for its 
canonical authority, however, is so overwhelming 
that negative testimony and the expression of 
doubts, which can be readily accounted for by the 
difficulties which the book raises in the minds of 
interpreters, should have little weight in discredit- 
ing the book, and, as in the case of Hebrews, the 
doubts entertained for a time by a portion of the 
churches increase the confidence with which ^ve 
accept their final decision. 

52. The judgment of the early churches re- 
irardinof the canonical character of the books of the 

1 Eusebius, Church Hist., vii. 25. 

2 Smith's Bible Diet., artiele Revelation. 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 81 

New Testament as now received, is confirmed by 
the general character of the New Testament apoc- 
ryphal literature. There were about fifty apocry- 
phal Gospels, all of which may, as far as we know 
them, be pronounced absolutely worthless. There 
were several imitations of the Book of Acts, as 
also of various Epistles and the Revelation, none of 
which succeeded in deceiving the churches. The 
Epistle of Barnabas, however, Avas received by 
the old Greek church as genuine, but not canon- 
ical, and was quoted seven times by Clement of 
Alexandria and three times by Origen. This was 
also found complete at the end of the celebrated 
Codex Sinaiticus.^ But it never received canon- 
ical recognition, or much attention, and is now 
generally supposed to have been written during 
the second century. 

53. The Shepherd of Hermas, called by Dean 
Stanley "the Pilgrim's Progress of the church of 
the second century," was certainly held in very 
high esteem at that time. It is quoted by Irenaeus, 
Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, and is found 
in connection with the Epistle of Barnabas at the 
end of the Codex Sinaiticus, just referred to. The 
Muratorian Canon also speaks of it, but says it 
was for private reading only. And there is 
nowhere any distinct acknowledgment of it as 
canonical ; while both TertuUian and Eusebius 

1 See below, paragraph 57. 



82 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

clearly reject it. Its being bound with some of 
the earliest copies of the New Testament has prob- 
ably no greater significance than a similar treat- 
ment bestowed upon the Apocrypha of the Old 
Testament in a lai-ge portion of the Protestant 
churches at the present time. 

54. The fact can scarcely have escaped the 
attention of the reader, that the books of the New 
Testament received by the early Christians as 
canonical are all attributed either directly or indi- 
rectly to the apostles. The books Avhich do not 
bear the name of an apostle are still connected 
with the apostles by the close relation to the apos- 
tles of the writers to whom they are attributed. 

Mark is w^ith one consent represented by the 
earliest Christian writers as the interpreter of 
Pefer. Luke, the author of the third Gospel and 
of Acts, is with equal unanimitj^ supposed to rep- 
resent the views of Paul. The Epistle to the 
Hebrews, if not attributed to Paul, is supposed 
to have been written by some one of his associates, 
of whom Luke, Barnabas, and Apollos are most 
prominently mentioned. James and Jude are 
either apostles or brethren of Christ, who were 
most intimately associated with the apostles. 

55. Discussions bearing on the canonical au- 
thority of the different books of the Bible are akin 
to those which are to follow immediately upon the 
purity of the text. It is essential to know what 



THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 83 

properly belongs to Sacred Scripture before we 
attempt to interpret it and accept the responsi- 
bility of incorporating the teachings of its several 
books into our systems of doctrinal belief. It is 
by no means an unimportant result of our investi- 
gations, that the apocryphal books of the Old 
Testament are found to be destitute of canonical 
authority. Had there been evidence that Christ 
and the apostles endorsed the Apocrypha as they 
did the canonical books of the Old Testament, the 
whole theology of Protestantism, like that of the 
Roman Catholic church, must have been adjusted 
to a belief in the intercession of angels and saints, 
and to a belief in purgatory and of the efficacy of 
prayers for the dead. The discussions concerning 
the few books in the Old Testament, about whose 
canonicity doubts have been expressed, are the less 
important, from the fact that those books contain 
no peculiar doctrines, but they belong rather to 
that portion of sacred literature desio-ned to irive 
a more vivid impression of some important phases 
of the truth. AVe accept them, however, even 
when we do not fully understand their purposes, 
as nevertheless organically connected with the 
Bible. They are not, like the Apocrypha, para- 
sites, but are genuine l)ranches of the tree. 

Having determined that each of the books of the 
New Testament as it now stands properly forms 



84 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

a part of Sacred Scripture, and thereby having 
assumed the responsibiht}^ of incorporating their 
ethical and religious teaching into our systems of 
doctrine, we must next consider whether we have 
these books in their original and uncorrupted form. 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM . 85 



yi. 

INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 

56. The inspiration of the writers who com- 
posed the Bible does not involve that of those who, 
at a later time, copied and translated the volume. 
Textual criticism is a science. By it we may ascer- 
tain, with a remarkable degree of accuracy, the 
form of our sacred literature as it came from the 
hands of the inspired writers, and as it was re- 
ceived and approved by the primitive churches. 
Those original writings are, so to speak, the 
geological formations deposited in the ages of 
inspiration, and which it is our business now rever- 
ently to study. When we find these deposits Ave 
find the rock. The secondarj^ processes by which 
we ascertain the metes and bounds of this under- 
lying solid stratum of the divine word, do not, 
indeed, lay claim to inspiration ; but a marked 
divine providence is clearly visible in the provis- 
ions made for securing confidence in the conchi- 
sions arrived at through the processes of textual 
criticism. 



86 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

57. The text of the New Testament to which 
we go for enlightenment is, in the main, estab- 
lished be3^ond all controversy. The gromids of 
this general confidence are so evident that they 
can be made plain even to popular apprehension. 

Everything indicates that, during the generation 
succeeding the apostles, the writings received by 
the primitive churches as inspired must have been 
reproduced and disseminated with great rapidity 
and with a high degree of accurac}' ; for they 
emerge during the second century over a vast area 
and in many places, l)ut with surprising agree- 
ment,, not only in substance of thought, but in all 
important forms of expression, and even in minute 
particulars of style. In the second century 
(probably in the early part of it) nearly the whole 
of the New Testament, as we now have it, was 
translated into Syriac.^ During the same period, 
in Northern Africa and Italy, transhitions appeared 
also in Latin. An Egyptian version also dates 
from the same period. The great writers of the 
latter part of the second century, and of the first 
half of the third century, — Justin Martyr (about 
150), Irena^us (175), Clement of Alexandria 
(200), Tertullian (220), and Origen (220),— 
al)ound in quotations from the New Testament ; so 
that we could almost reconstruct the volume from 
their treatises alone. A century or two later 

1 See paragraphs 45 and 45 b. 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 87 

copies (still preserved) were made, presumably 
from the best accredited manuscripts then extant. 
Notable among these early copies are firsts the 
Codex SiNArncus (now in the library of St. 
Petersburg), discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 in 
a convent on Mount Sinai, and dating, in all 
probability, from about a. d. 350 ; second^ the 
Codex Vaticanus (preserved in the Vatican li- 
brary at Rome), and dating doubtless from about 
the same period with the Sinaiticus ; thinly the 
Codex Alexandrinus (brought, from Constanti- 
nople to London in 1753), and dating about a. d. 
450 ; fourth^ Codex Ephraemi (now in the library 
at Paris), and doubtless dating also from about 
the middle of the fifth century \ fifths Codex Bezae 
(now in Cambridge, England), and dating from 
the close of the fifth, or the first of the sixth, cen- 
tury of our era. Besides these there are more 
than fifteen hundred manuscripts of a later date. 
Thus it appears, as one of the highest authorities 
has said, that " Providence has ordered it so that 
the New Testament can appeal to a far larger 
number of all kinds of original sources than the 
whole of the rest of ancient Creek literature."^ 

58. As is to be expected in books made by 
hand; no two copies exactly agree. This does not, 
however, lead to the endless confusion which some 
might suppose, for in a multitude of manuscripts, 

^ Tischendorf, Introduction to New Testament, p. viii. 



88 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

MS in a multitude of counsellors, there is safety. 
The variations in one manuscript offset those in 
another ; and out of the whole the original text 
emerges with a surprisingly small range of uncer- 
tainty. According to the latest and best authority, 
seven-eighths of the Avords of the New Testament 
have passed the ordeal of textual criticism without 
question ; and of the remaining one-eighth, only a 
small fraction are sul)ject to reasonable doubt ; so 
that fiftj-nine sixtieths of the words of the New 
Testament, as they came from the original authors, 
are known with practical certaint3\ And even of 
the one-sixtieth open to question the larger part 
of the doubt pertains to changes of order in the 
words, and other comparative trivialities; "so 
that the amount of what can in an}^ sense be called 
substantial variation is but a small fraction of the 
whole residuary variation, and can hardl}^ form 
more than a thousandth part of the entire text."^ 
59. As illustrative of the trivial character of 
the changes suggested 1)y textual criticism, we will 
give a few specimens from the eighth edition of 
Tischendorf's Critical Greek Testament, which 
happens to be at hand. Opening at the first verse 
of the first chapter of Romans, the only critical 
question raised is whether to read ''Jesus Christ" 
or "Christ Jesus"; which, as any one may see, 

^ Westcott and II oil's Introduction to the Now Testament 
in Original Greek, p. 2. 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICIS3I. 89 

has no bearing upon the meaning of the verse. 
The same question is raised about the order of 
these same words in a number of other phices in 
this Epistle, and in each case goes to swell the list 
of textual variations. 

On verse third one question is whether to spell 
Daveid, or Davidj or Dab id. The second critical 
note upon this verse is whether, in the phrase " was 
born of the seed of David," the reading should 

be yerouipov OV yevvM(.ihov^ the SCCOnd of wllich 

must mean ^^ was born," and the first may mean 
"was born," but would admit of the more generic 
construction ''was made " ; so the change, if sup- 
ported by sufficient evidence, would be of small 
account ; but the evidence in favor of the com- 
mon text is overwhelming, and it is therefore 
retained. 

Upon verse fourth it is found that the word 
translated " declared " is, according to some author- 
ities, compounded with a preposition (>t^6), making- 
it mean ''declared heforeJiand.'' There is a varia- 
tion, also, respecting the case of the word {nrBvija) 
meaning "spirit"; and some authorities would 
insert "and" before the prepositional clause "ac- 
cording to the spirit." None of these changes, 
however, is particularly important, and none is 
approved by any modern critic. 

There are no other critical notes until reaching 
verse 7, where there is a question as to the retention 



DO THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE* 

of "PcouT] in the passage, and as to whether the 
clause " beloved of God " should not be replaced 
b}^ one meaning ^' in the love of God " ; but the evi- 
dence for these changes is slight, and the received 
text stands. 

In verse 8 some texts would omit an untranslated 
connective, w4iich, if introduced, would be repre- 
sented by our word '^ then," ^^ First, then." There 
is also a question as to which of two synonymous 
prepositions {^^q( , unig) should stand in the phrase 
translated ^4br you all." And so, for the most 
part, the dull process of textual criticism pro- 
ceeds, — with only now and then an eventful 
episode touching a change which would in any 
serious manner affect the sense. 

60. We would not, however, throw any dis- 
credit upon the work of the textual critics, but 
would give them their full share of praise for their 
intinite patience and untiring industry. The world 
owes them an unbounded debt of latitude for 
their work. The Greek Text of the Xew Testa- 
ment, by Westcott and Hort, represents the com- 
bined labor of two scholars for thirty years ; and 
even so they were but working over material col- 
lected by other investigators who had devoted their 
whole lives to the examination of original authori- 
ties. But our remarks are designed to emphasize 
the fact that textual critics are not the ones wdio 
receive the impression that there is any such un- 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 91 

certainty respecting the text of the New Testament 
as seriously to affect the doctrine of inspiration. 
There are, indeed, a number of important disputed 
readings, and a number of passages formerly re- 
ceived and depended upon as proof-texts which in 
the present light must be omitted, and a number 
of important readings that must be displaced by 
others better attested. The doubts, however, 
respecting some portions of the text are no more 
serious than the doubts which have always existed 
respecting the true interpretation of certain portions 
of Scripture ; and, while some of the changes or 
omissions deprive us of proof-texts upon which we 
had been accustomed to depend, all these changes 
together will not seriously* modify a single vital 
doctrine of the Bible. 

61. Among the more important omissions and 
modifications of passages in the New Testament 
made necessary by modern textual criticism, the 
following may be mentioned by way of illustration : 
An important passage in determining the author- 
ship of the Book of Hebrews depends for its force 
upon the presence or absence of a single iota (t). 
If in Heb. x. 34 we read with the received text 
Jfor^tiorc, instead of dso^uioig with the modern critics, 
the passage should be translated '^ Ye had compas- 
sion of me in my bonds," which would plainly in- 
dicate that Paul was the writer ; l)ut if, with better 
authorities, we insert the additional iota (t) we 



92 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

must translate " Ye had compassion upon tliem that 
were in bonds," — thus removing the verse alto- 
gether from the Pauline side of the argument. In 
1 Tim. i. 4 the chano-e of a sinole letter in a sins^le 
Greek word transforms the clause " godly edifying 
which is in faith " into " a cliqyensation of God 
which is in faith" (oixodo/ulup changed to oiKovouiup^. 
In 1 Tim. iii. 16 there has been a long-continued 
and heated controversy over the reading ; some 
making the last clause read " God w^as manifest in 
the flesh," others, ^'he iclio was manifested in the 
flesh." The forms of the two Greek w^ords upon 
wdiich this reading depends {Wc "God" and OC 
" who ") are so nearly alike that they could readily 
be confounded in a badly worn manuscript. 

At the behest of textual criticism, too, we must 
probably omit the doxology from the Lord's prayer 
in ]\Iatthew ; and in the angelic annunciation of the 
Saviour's birth, instead of finding a general procla- 
mation of ^^ Peace and good will to men," we must 
read "Peace to men of good pleasure." In Matt. 
V. 22 we shall no longer read "angry with his 
brother wiiliout a caiise^'^ but simply " angry w^ith 
his brother." The last eleven verses of Mark were 
probabl}^ not written by the same author as the 
rest of the book. It is a question just how much 
apostolic authority should be ascribed to the verses. 
John V. 4, which explains the disturbance of the 
water in the Pool of Bethesda ))y the theory that 



INSPIRATION x\ND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 93 

an jingel went down at a certain time and troubled 
it, is omitted by the best texts. The oldest texts 
also omit the first eleven verses of John viii., con- 
taining the account of the woman taken in adul- 
tery ; but this, like the last eleven verses of Mark, 
is too long to have been inserted by accident, and 
too striking in its character to have been admitted 
into the Scriptures at the early date at which we 
find it in some of the versions and quotations of 
the fathers, except on good authority. On the 
other hand, it has been aflSrmed, that as this 
passage in John occupies exactly four of the 
pages of the pai)yrus sheets upon which the 
Gospel was originally written, it may by a trifling 
accident have been easily omitted from the ex- 
emplar from which were copied the early man- 
uscripts that want it (the Sinaitic, Alexan- 
drian, and the Vatican). The loss of four of the 
fragile papyrus pages would not be an unlikely 
event ; but their addition without overwhelming 
evidence would be most unlikely.^ 

But critics are all agreed that the clause in the 
seventh and eighth verses of the fifth chapter of 
First John, relating to the three that bear record 
in heaven, should be omitted, as it is found in no 
ancient manuscript, in no ancient version, and is 
quoted by none of the early fathers when arguing 

1 See monograph of J. Rendel Harris in the Supplement to 
the American Journal of Philology for Dec. 1882. 



94 THE DIVINE AUTUOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

on the subject of the Trinity. God did not, how- 
ever, leave that doctrine to the attestation of a 
single text ; but the doctrine is so wrought into the 
warp and Avoof of the New Testament that a half 
dozen proof-texts might be removed without 
seriously diminishing its certainty. 

62. These are sufficient to illustrate the char- 
acter of the claims of textual criticism. We may 
profitably turn our attention to a few of the facts 
and principles from which this science justly 
derives its authority. As already mentioned, there 
are two manuscripts — the Sinaitic and the Vati- 
can — which clearly antedate all others; and these 
are the two whose authority has come to have 
preponderating weight above that of almost any 
combination against them. It comes, therefore, 
to be an important and interesting question Avhy 
we should pay such deference to these two manu- 
scripts, which are themselves but copies made two 
hundred and fifty or three hundred years later 
than the originals. What is there to show that 
manuscripts of the sixth or seventh century were 
not copied either from the originals or from manu- 
scripts executed earlier than the date of the Sinaitic 
or Vatican? The answer is, that by scientific 
reasoning we can })rove the Sinaitic and Vatican 
manuscrii)ts to be not only earlier in date than 
others, but also to be nearer the originals in form 
and structure. In arriving at this result we are 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 95 

dependent upon two or three obvious rules of 
internal evidence. 

63. In copying manuscripts, the changes which 
are likely to be made by an honest scribe (and 
there are no indications at all of dishonest attempts 
to manipulate the ancient texts upon w^iicli we 
most rely) are in the direction, firsts of removing 
seeming grammatical errors ; and second^ of add- 
ing explanatory words in difficult passages for the 
sake of removing apparent obscurit}- ; and third, 
where parallel records like the Gospels occur, of 
assimilating one to the other. Little more than 
the mere statement of these principles is needed to 
carry conviction. AVe all know how natural it is 
to add a word which logically completes the idea 
expressed. Few persons, in repeating the prom- 
ise of the Saviour to be with us where two or three 
are o-athered too-ether,^ would limit themselves to 
the exact words of Scripture, but would very 
naturally make that addition- so often heard, and 
which so perfectly completes the idea implicitly 
contained in the passage, and would say, "For 
where two or three are o-athered tosfether in mv 
name, there am I in the midst of them, and that 
to bless.'' The true reading in Matt. xxv. 6 doubt- 
less is, "Behold, the bridegroom " ; but a respecta- 
ble number of texts read, " Behold, the bridegroom 
comethJ' In this case nothing new is realh^ added, 

^ Matt, xviii. 20. - Printed in italics below. 



96 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

but the fuller form merely states explicitly the 
impWcit contents of the shorter form. Again, in 
Matt, xviii. 28 the older manuscripts read, "Pay 
what thou owest," while the later manuscripts 
read, ^^Pay me what thou owest." So in Luke 
xxiv. 53 the older manuscripts read, ^'were con- 
tinually in the temple, blessing God"; w^hile the 
later manuscripts read, "were continually in the 
temple, praising and blessing God." As any one 
can see, this instinctive and unconscious tendency 
to round out the expression of the idea convej-ed, 
is a force which w^ould be constantly operating 
upon the minds of scribes, and w^ould tend to cor- 
rupt the text. Furthermore, this tendency w^ould 
be still more strongly felt when, as in the case of 
the parallel passages found in the first three Gos- 
pels, one form was originally fuller than another. 
Familiaritv with the lono^er form of one evano-elist 
would render it a most natural occurrence for the 
scribe in writing the shorter form of one evangelist, 
to fill it out accordino^ to the lonwr form of the 
other, and thus assimilate the two. For example, 
in Matt. viii. 33 w^e read that the keepers of the 
swine that w^ere possessed, "fled, and went their 
ways into the city, and told." In Luke^ the older 
texts read simply, they ''fled, and told" it. Very 
naturally, however, later scribes, familiar with the 
form in Matthew, filled out the statement in Luke 

1 Luke viii. 31. 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 97 

SO that it should read, as in the later texts, the 
keepers "fled, and Avent, and told"; thus uncon- 
sciously assimilating the two accounts. So, again, 
in Mark i. 2 the older manuscripts give an abbre- 
viated quotation from Malachi, ^^ Behold, I send 
my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare 
thy way."i In Matt. xi. 10 and Luke vii. 27 the 
quotation is rounded out by the addition of " before 
thee," making it read, "shall prepare thy way 
before thee.'' Hence, some later scribe naturally, 
and perhaps unconsciously, filled out the quota- 
tion in ]\Iark, so as to assimilate it in form to that 
Avith which all were familiar in the other Gospels. 

64. A third unconscious force operating to 
secure slight variations in the text, consists in the 
tendency, always present in the scribe, to remove 
seeming obscurities and grammatical blunders, 
which he supposes may have come into the text 
through the carelessness of a former scribe. 

In estimating the force of these unconscious 
tendencies operating upon the minds of scribes, we 
are not permitted to restrict ourselves to single 
instances, but are bound to examine a great num- 
1)er of cases, so as to obtain by the law of general 
average a conclusion that is substantial. Such a 
survey of the facts proves, beyond all reasonable 
doubt, that the two oldest manuscripts — the 
Sinaitic and Vatican — are not only the oldest 

* Mai. iii. 1. 



98 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

manuscripts, but are, by all odds, the most correct 
manuscripts of the New Testament in existence ; 
so that the presumption is well-nigh overwhelming 
that the readings in which they agree are closest 
to the original copies. The general correctness 
of these manuscripts is shown a. l)y their rela- 
tive freedom from the errors naturally arising 
from the three causes just mentioned ; h, from the 
confirmation which their readino-s in o-eneral derive 
from the oldest versions ; and c. from the quotations 
of the early fathers. AVe will illustrate by a single 
case occurring in Mark i. 11, whei-e the Sinaitic 
and Vatican texts read, "in tliee I am well pleased," 
but the later texts give it, '' in ichom I am well 
pleased," which is also the reading in the corre- 
sponding passage in Matt. iii. 17. The text in 
Matthew is unquestionably '' in whom " ; that in 
Mark only is open to dispute. 

Now, on the principle of assimilation, in Mark 
the change from in tltee to in ivlioni would be most 
naturally effected by a scribe who remembered the 
form in Matthew. As we have said, the prol)a- 
bility in this single case that an error has arisen 
from assimilation would be slight ; but when we 
find that, as the best of authorities assure us, and 
as any one can see by a few hours' examination, 
the instances of probable error naturally arising 
from assimilation are fift}^ times more numerous in 
the later manuscripts than in the Sinaitic and 



INSPIRATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 99 

Vatican, these two earlier manuscripts come to 
have great indepandent authority, and on this 
ground alone we should give the preference to the 
reading in Mark, "in tliee I am well pleased." 
But this is not all. The reading "in thee" is 
independently proved to he very old from its 
incorporation into the earliest versions, namely, 
the Syriac, the Latin, and the Egyptian. And 
here again, the coincidence of the oldest versions 
with the readino; of the Sinaitic and the Vatican 
manuscripts would be of slight account if it existed 
only in this single instance. But the coincidences 
are sufficiently frequent to prove the law. Tregelles, 
one of the highest authorities upon the subject, 
estimates that the instances in which these old 
texts are proved by the versions to contain the 
oldest known readings number between two and 
three thousand ; and thus they are shown by an 
independent process not only to be old themselves, 
but to represent most closely the text which is 
the oldest. 

Again, the Sinaitic and the Vatican, and the 
allied cluster of manuscripts which they repre- 
sent, are proved to contain the very oldest read- 
ings by comparing them with the numerous 
quotations from Scripture found in the writings of 
the church fathers of the second and third cen- 
turies. 

65. There can be no question that modern 



100 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

textual criticism is a science, resting upon a solid 
basis of observation and natural law. If we could 
be as confident that we are correct in interpreting 
Scripture as we are in fixing upon the original 
text, we might count ourselves fortunate indeed. 
It would, however, be too much to hope by appli- 
cation of the rules of textual criticism to remove 
every obscurity relating to the original copies ; 
but these obscurities may certainly be reduced to 
very insignificant proportions, so as to be of little 
more account than the spots upon the sun. 

Having, therefore, by these scientific critical 
processes confirmed our confidence in the general 
accuracy of the Greek text of the sacred writings, 
and having eliminated the few corruptions that 
had unconsciously been incorporated into these 
Avritings, the next question in order will be. What 
do the Scriptures mean? for, as before remarked, 
it is the sense of the word of God which lias 
authority, and not the sound. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 101 



yii. 

INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 

66. Many erroneous opinions concerning the 
Bible obtain popular credence from want of famil- 
iarity with the principles and results of biblical 
interpretation. Bil)lical interpretation is a science 
with well-established principles of procedure, and 
whose conclusions are by no means so indefinite 
and uncertain as is frequently represented. The 
province of this science is to ascertain the meaning 
of the Bible. The doctrine of the infallibility of 
the Bible has suffered much from lack of accurate 
definition, and most of the objections urged against 
it disappear upon making the discriminations which 
the nature of the subject demands. Infallibility 
can be attributed to the Bible only as a whole, and 
as related to its designed eft'ect in human histoiy. 
Much of the fallibility attri))uted to it belongs to 
its interpreters, and arises from their needless 
ignorance and prejudice. The doctrine of inspira- 
tion implies that, as a divine factor in human his- 
tory, the Bil)le is perfectly adapted to its work. 
That w^ork, however, is much more comprehensive 



102 THE DIVINE AUTllOlllTY OF THE BIBLE. 

than some of the conimentators and critics are 
willing to admit. An historical revelation of the 
nature, character, and purposes of God must of 
necessity be many-sided, or it would not be adapted 
to the varying conditions of the human race. It 
must meet the wants of the ages to which it is first 
given, and at the same time be couched in such 
language and presented in sucli form that future 
ages sliall be able to extract its meaning. The 
written word of God must have points of attach- 
ment adapting it to use among rude and l)arbarous 
tribes,^ and at the same time must be so full of 
meaning, so perfect in its form, and so sublime in 
its outlook, as to satisfy the wants of the most 
cultivated ages. In the same storehouse we must 
find both milk for babes and meat for strong men. 
The truth must be preserved in such plain precepts 
and bold outlines as shall justify the assertion that 
''wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err there- 
in."^ At the same time revelation must lead on 
from glory to glory, and securely and wisely con- 
duct the race forward toward the ever-widening 
horizon of eternity. 

67. Eeverence is one of the first duties im- 
posed upon man l)y the presence of a divine reve- 
lation. A divine revelation is in its ver}^ nature 
calculated to overawe the human mind. And if we 
I'cally believe that God is speaking to us through 

1 See below, chapter ix. 2 jga. xxxv. 8. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 103 

the Bil)le, we shall, like Moses at the burning bush, 
put off our shoes from our feet,^ and bow our 
heads in subdued reverence to hear the message 
which that voice brings. For various reasons it is 
impossible for one who believes in the divine 
authenticity of Christianity to treat the Bil)le as he 
would other books. In our interpretation of the 
Bible we are not at liberty to overlook the divine 
element pervading it. To interpret the Bible as if 
the writers had no more authority than comes from 
the ordinary illumination of the Holy Spirit, is to 
ignore th^ most prominent teachings of the whole 
volume. 

68. The written word of God, like the Word 
which became flesh, must needs be human in its 
manward aspect ; for the written word is divine 
thought manifest in human language as Christ was 
God manifest in human flesh. As the compound 
personalit}' of Christ was conditioned by the flesh, 
so the compound character of a written revelation 
is conditioned by the nature of language. As God 
in becoming incarnate did not take upon him the 
form of angels, l)ut of the seed of Abraham, so 
the written revelation is not sent in a form adapted 
to heavenly beings, l)ut in a form suited to men. 
And it is in this that the perfection of the word of 
God consists. It is adapted to men. Though 'a 
veritable deposit of divine thought, the Bible is 

1 Ex. iii. 5. 



104 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

provided with all the allurements necessary to 
attract men to search for its divine message ; and 
when found the message is accompanied with all 
the appropriate indications of its divine character. 
It goes, therefore, for little as against the doctrine 
of inspiration to say that in subjecting the divine 
word to a written form it is thereby made depend- 
ent on human language, which is variously imper- 
fect. Of course a written revelation is thus 
dependent, and for that very reason its writers 
needed the special supervision of the Divine Spirit. 
Nor does it weigh against the divine authority of 
the Scriptures, that a written revelation must take 
color from the mental and moral conditions of the 
age in which it was first made, and be affected by 
the mental and moral condition of the individu<al 
human authors ; for these are phenomenal elements 
whose relation to the central cause can be easily 
ascertained. It is the province of the science of 
interpretation, by a careful survey of the whole 
field, to eliminate the influence of these superficial 
elements, and penetrate to the region of pure white 
light produced by a divine combination of comple- 
mentary colors. It is a prime excellence of the 
Bible, that its thouo-ht is not contained solelv in 
single forms of expression, but is discerned as a 
compound resultant of various forms. In "divers 
portions and in divers manners " ^ God has spoken 

1 Heb. i, 1. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 105 

to the world through holy men and prophets ; but 
all unite to produce a harmonious impression, and 
to secure the designed result. 

69. An essential requisite to the proper inter- 
pretation of the Bible is a profound sense of human 
ignorance; hence the importance of the maxim, 
Interpret the Bible ivith pray erf ulness and sobriety. 
Our knowledge is infinitesimal as compared with 
God's knowledge. This fact imposes humility 
upon the interpreter alike of God's work and of 
God's word. The outlying field of mystery — 
connected both with the clearly revealed facts of 
nature and of the Bible — must be allowed neither to 
discredit the facts we have nor to lead us into the 
fields of vague and useless speculation. A thou- 
sand questions can be asked concerning any plain 
matter of fact where one can be answered. In 
this respect nature and the Bible are alike ; but 
nature is far more abundant in things to which we 
ascribe no definite design than the Bible is in facts 
in v>1iicli we fail to see definite marks of inspiration. 
It is nevertheless true that in nature we can confi- 
dently attribute design to the sparrow's fall, and 
this not because we can definitely trace the design, 
but because the event is connected Avith a S3^stem 
which we have the best of reasons for believing is 
as a whole the product of design ; and we can defy 
any one to prove the absence of purpose even in 
the minutest fact of nature. Thus, also, the inter- 



106 THE DIVINE AUTIJOIUTY OF THE BIBLE. 

preter of the Bible may IVeely acknowledge his 
ignorance concerning the precise function or mean- 
ing of many portions of Scripture, while holding, 
nevertheless, with the utmost confidence to the 
conviction that the Bible in every part has a 
divinely chosen function and significance. Where 
so much is clear, and the whole is so perspicuous, 
it devolves upon those who criticise the Bible in 
its minute details, to prove that the portions to 
which they object cannot possibly have any proper 
function in a divine revelation. We need not say 
that to prove such a universal negative is not an 
easy task. To succeed in the undertaking, the 
critic must be able to survey the whole universe, 
and to comprehend the wants of the human race in 
every detail. 

70. Correlated with the previous principle, 
which puts in the foreground the necessary limita- 
tions of human knowledge, is another of a positive 
character, which may be stated as follows : The 
more obscure jportlons of the Bible should be filter- 
preted according to the evident main purpose of the 
whole ; or, in other words, we should assume that the 
Bible is consistent in itself; — hence, in interpreting 
it we must consider the relations of one part to 
another, and should take the clearer portions for 
our guide, while reverentl}' attempting to discover 
the meaning of the obscurer parts. 

71. Closely connected with the foregoing is the 



IXTEIIPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 107 

pi'incii)le tli;it the wviievs of the Bihle are their own 
best expounders. It is the more iiiiportant to insist 
upon this principle since it is just now the object 
of so many attacks. One of the most impressive 
lines of evidence in proof of a pervasive divine 
element in the Bible consists in the remarkal)le 
unity binding it together from Genesis to Eevela- 
tion. Though a collection of books most diverse 
in form and human authorship, there is a sublime 
strain of supernaturalism running through it all, 
and separating it by a sharp line of demarcation 
from all other literature. It is necessary for the 
biblical interpreter constantly to keep in view this 
assumed and asserted element of the supernatural 
in the Bible, or he will fail of comprehending even 
its simplest passages. It is this pervasive super- 
natural element that gives to the OKI Testament its 
dignity, and to the writers of the New their con- 
sistenc3\ Without it the writings of Christ and 
the apostles must fail to conunand and retain our 
respect. There are divinely chosen Avords of 
prophecy in the Old Testament telling of Christ 
that should come. Tliere are types in the Old 
Testament which can be full\' understood onl\' as 
seen in the light reflected back upon them from the 
New Testament. We cannot divorce the Old 
Testament from the New without destroying the 
authority and meaning of both. The Old Testa- 
ment is not perfect without the New, and the 



108 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

New Testament is incomprehensible without the 
Old. 

72. We do not see how some recent writers 
can maintain the respect which they profess to do 
for the authors of the New Testament while speak- 
ing so contemptuously of their ability to interpret 
the Old Testament. For example, we find Pro- 
fessor Toy saying, when speaking of Paul's 
method of interpretation, that ^' where he has a 
thesis to establish from the Old Testament (espec- 
ially in Galatians and Romans), he employs 
without stint the forced and spiritualizing inter- 
pretation of the times. . . . Paul's methodical ex- 
position (see Rom. iv. and Gal. iii., iv.) was 
probably taken from the school-teaching of the 
Jerusalem doctors ; he and they w^ere forced, by 
the necessities of a long-drawn-out argument, into 
a thoroughly arbitrary style of exegesis."^ The 
dogmatic material of the Book of Hebrew^s " differs 
from that of Paul ; . . . but its hermeneutical 
method, like his, is rabbinical. ... Its lofty and 
inspiring religious thought is violently connected 
with the Old Testament by an unsound exegesis."^ 
Even Professor Ladd can say : " It is this keen 
hunt for ethico-religious truth, as it exists in its 
essential unity under various forms of expression, 
which induces some of the quotations from the Old 

1 Quotations of the New Testament, p. xxxvi. 

2 Ibid., p. xxxvii. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 109 

Testament in the New that are most difficult and 
even impossible critically to justify." ^ And Pro- 
fessor Toy can describe the rabbinical exegesis of 
Christ's day as utterly unhistorical, unscientific, 
arbitrary, " uncontrolled by sound principles of ni- 
ter pre tati on" ;'^ ready, on the one hand, to invest 
each word of Scripture ^^with an independent 
meaning, which it retained even when wrested from 
its proper position in the discourse " ; and, on the 
ather hand, to regard each sentence or word as " a 
m\^sterious sign of such ideas as the devout, but 
undirected, imagination of the reader demanded " ; 
and yet say " the New Testament method is the 
same in general as this," " only far more cautious 
and reserved." Again, Pi^ofessor Toy affirms that 
the Old Testament is to be made its own inter- 
preter.^ ^'This fulfilment [of the Old Testament 
promises] is brought out in the New Testament, 
though in most cases by, or in connection with, a 
method of interpretation that cannot be called 
legitimate. The natural, historical interpretation 
seeming to them not to yield satisfactory results, 
the New Testament writers spiritualize ; but faulty 
exegesis is no great matter alongside of the power 
of their theme, and the inspiration of their pure 
and strong spiritual thought."^ 

1 Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, Yol. I. p. 172. 

2 Quotations of the New Testament, pp. xxii., xxiii. 

3 Ibid., p. xxvi. "* Ibid., p. xxvii. 



110 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

73. We cannot, however, admit that it is in 
accordance with the best canons of hermeneutical 
science, as applied to the Old Testament, to reckon 
the words of Jesus and the apostles as of no 
authority in interpreting the Old Testament. We 
trust few would be willing to accept the statement 
of Professor Toy, that, ''as an individual man he 
[Jesus] had of necessity a definite, restricted in- 
tellectual outfit and outlook ; and these could be 
only those of his day and generation."^ It by no 
means follows, as Professor Toy asserts, that be- 
cause Jesus as a man does not know the day of con- 
summation,^ he may not be supposed to know the 
science of the criticism of the Old Testament. 
Such a use of the word science is, to say the least, 
far from being felicitous. For what is the science 
of any given subject if it be not a methodical 
summary of what we know al)Out the subject? 
and what shall we think of Christ and the apostles, 
if they pretended to expound the Old Testament, 
and did not know how to do it, and did not under- 
stand what the Old Testament was intended to 
teach? Instead of saying, then, with Professor 
Toy, that it was clearly not the purpose of the New 
Testament writers to teach exegesis,^ we should 
sajs that to unfold the meaning of the Old Testa- 
ment was exactly what they professed to do. And, 

^ Quotations of the New Testament, p. xxviii. 
2 Matt. xxiy. 30. ^ Ibid., p. xxx. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. Ill 

in unfolding that teaching, Christ and the apostles 
bring clearly to light a supernatural harmony be- 
tween the writings of the Old Testament and the 
facts and doctrines of the New. It therefore cer- 
tainly is a most important exegetical principle that 
our investigations regarding any part of the Script- 
ure should be guided by the interpretation put 
upon it in other portions of Scripture. 

We especially need this loyalty to the writers of 
the New Testament, not only to obtain that view 
of the typical character of much of the Old Testa- 
ment which is necessary to justify its application 
to the tacts of the New Testament ; but we need 
to adhere to the New Testament models of inter- 
pretation, in order to restrain us from the un- 
licensed use of type and allegory. 

74. For example, in Matt. xxii. 43 the one 
hundred and tenth Psalm, which begins, "The 
Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right 
hand," and in verse 4 says, "Thou art a priest 
forever after the order of Melchizedek," is inter- 
preted as referring to Christ himself. These 
words, Christ says, were spoken by David in the 
Spirit (fcV TtrevifaTi). The importance of the appli- 
cation may be inferred from its reappearing in the 
parallel passages in Mark^ and Luke,^ and, again, 
in Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost,^ as well 
as in Heb. i. 13. Thus the extended allegory in 

1 Mark xii. 36. 2 L^ke xx. 42. ^ ^cts ii. 34, 35. 



112 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Hebrews concerning Melchizcdek and Christ draws 
its warrant from the Saviour's own interpretation 
of Ps. ex. In Matt. xxvi. 31 Christ applies to 
himself the words of Zech. xiii. 7, "I will smite 
the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be 
scattered." In Luke iv. 18, 19 {^''^ ^^The Spirit 
of the Lord is upon me, because he anointed me 
to preach good tidings to the poor : he hath sent 
me to proclaim release to the captives, and recover- 
ing of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them 
that are bruised, ^^^^ to proclaim the acceptable 
year of the Lord") Christ applies to himself the 
words of Isaiah.^ In Luke xxii. 37, Christ says 
of the words, " And he was reckoned with trans- 
gressors " (taken from Isa. liii. 12), "This which 
is written must be fultilled in me." 

In the last three passages Christ clearly gives 
his own sanction to a profounder and more far- 
reaching interpretation of the prophecies than 
appears on their face. The true idea is that all 
the oflices under the theocracy were typical of 
Christ. Christ combines all in one. He is priest 
in the absolute sense, and a real king. In INIatt. 
xxvi. 31, as well as in the tenth chapter of John, 
Christ calls himself the "shepherd." Again, in 
Matt. xxiv. 15 Christ interprets Dan. ix. 27 ; xi. 
31; xii. 11, as referring to what was about to 
occur in the destruction of Jerusalem by the 

1 Isa. Ixi. 1, 2; Iviii. 6; xxix. 18, 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 113 

Romans.^ Or if "the abomination of desolation" 
be referred to the profanation of the temple by 
Antiochus Epiphanes, the occurrences under Titus 
would be an event of the same class prefigured by 
that. Christ has also, in emphatic and numerous 
ways, given his consent to the idea that the types 
of the Old Testament refer to him and his times. ^ 
In Mark ix. 13 Elijah is said to be a type of John 
the Baptist. We are thus led to suppose that the 
similarity between these men — both in their 
character and their history — was ordered by 
Divine Providence. Nor is it unusual for Christ 
to refer in general terms to the whole Old Testa- 
ment as a prophecy of himself.^ The only quota- 
tion of Christ which seems even to savor of rab- 
binical sophistry is in Matt. xxii. 32, where he 
proves the possibility of the resurrection from Ex. 
iii. 6, ''I am the God of Abraham," etc., and 
adds, "God is not the God of the dead^ but of the 
living, ^^ The force of his' argument, however, does 
not lie in the use of the present tense (I am), — 
for the verl) is not expressed at all in the Hebrew 
of the original passage, — but in the inevitable in- 

» See Cowles on Dan. ix. 26, 27. 

2 See John v. 39, 46; vii. 38; where the Scriptures and 
Moses are said to have written of him. Cf. Jolm iii. 14, '^ As 
Moses lifted up the serpent," etc., and the passages referring 
to the Lord's supper. 

3 See Matt, xxvi, 24, 54, 56; Luke xxiv. 27, 44; John xiii, 
18; xvii. 12, 



114 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

ference that when God pays so much attention to 
creatures as he did to the patriarchs, and calls 
himself their God, they must be more than mere 
transient existences, or there is a striking incon- 
gruity in the amount of attention paid to them. 
With such a view of the passage there is no tinge 
of sophistry in it. 

We conclude, then, that Christ has given his 
sanction to the view expressed by De Wette ; viz. 
that '' the whole Old Testament is one great 
prophecy, one great type, of him who was to 
come, and is come ; and that the typological com- 
parison of the Old Testament with the New is no 
mere idle play ; and it cannot be pure accident 
that the evangelical history in most important par- 
ticulars runs parallel with the Mosaic."^ 

75. Paul likewise interprets the Old Testament 
in a typical sense. The most striking example is 
Gal. iv. 21-31, which the apostle in verse 24 calls 
an allegory. Hagar and her descendants sym- 
l)olize the law given on JMount Sinai and its 
adherents ; while Sarah and her descendants corre- 
spond to the church of Christ. Again, Isa. liv. 1 
is applied^ to the enlargement of the Je^vish 
church Avhich took place upon the introduction of 
the Gentiles into the Christian church. Gen. xxi. 
10 is likewise applied^ to the Jews, who were 

1 Of. tiie author's LoGjic of Christian Evidences, pp. 270-274. 

2 Gal. iv. 27. ^ Gal. iv. CO. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 115 

rejected because of their unreasonable attachment 
to the law. 

The quotation of Deut. xxv. 4 in 1 Cor. ix. 9, 
10 ; and 1 Tim. v. 18 illustrates in an admirable 
way the true method of bringing out the deeper 
spiritual sense of the Scriptures. In Timothy the 
inference is unexpressed, but mevitable. The 
Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox 
when he treadeth out the corn ; the inference is, 
much less should you withhold temporal support 
from spiritual teachers. A universal principle 
appears in a special application. But in 1 Cor. 
ix. 9, 10 the apostle seems to say that the origi- 
nal passage had no literal meaning, and that God 
did not care for oxen ; that this was said altogether 
(nd^'uxig) on our account. This may be explained 
as an hyperbole. The Old Testament familiarized 
us with the principle involved in our treatment of 
animals, but its broader application was of such 
superlative importance that it completely over- 
shadows the other. Here, too, the correspondence 
between type and antitype is looked upon as 
designed. 

In 1 Cor. X. 1-4 the pillar of fire, the manna, and 
the living water of Moses' time, are spoken of as 
designed types of Christ, In the fourth and sixth 
chapters of John the last two of these same types 
are used. 

In Gal. iii. 16 the argument seems to turn on 



116 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

the realistic idea of species (^uTiiQiua), The inter- 
pretation here has certainly brought out hidden 
meaning in the argument. There was a pre- 
established harmony between the physical element 
giving unity to a species and the spiritual element 
oivins: unity to believers in Christ. 

Both in Hebrew and Greek as well as in English 
the word for "seed" has a different meaning in the 
singular from that conveyed by the plural. In the 
singular the specific character of the seed is thrown 
into the foreground, in the plural the individual. 
jNIustard seed has a very different shade of meaning 
from mustard seeds. So the seed of Abraham is 
only one in kind, and in a very real sense it is 
Christ, who, in becoming head of that seed, im- 
parts specific character and unity to it. 

The ninth chapter of Romans well shows the 
ordinary historical method of Paul's quotations. 
The allegory of Hagar in Gal. iv. 27 is virtually 
repeated here. There is an Israel of the flesh and 
an Israel of faith. ^ This last verse, '' I lay in Zion 
a stone of stumbling," is applied to Christ in a 
typical sense. 2 

Acts xiii. 35 is interesting as giving a Messianic 
interpretation to Ps. xvi. 10, which could not be 

1 See quotations in verses 8, 9, 12, 18, 15, 17, 25, 29, 33. 

2 See further Gal, ill. 8; Rom, iv. 11, 17, in all of which 
places an enlarged meaning is given to an historical parallel. It 
is the true principle of evolution in the history of the church. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 117 

drawn except on the view that Christ is the person 
in whom all Old Testament types and history 
centre and receive their fulfilment. Many of 
Paul's citations would seem mei^e accommodations 
but for this view of the typical character of all the 
Old Testament literature. The original sense of 
the passages quoted is often restricted or enlarged 
by the apostle, but never falsified. ^^The apostle 
proceeds like one who, having seen a completed 
picture and then cast a glance upon the outline 
sketch, believes he sees more indicated there than 
he who is familiar only with the sketch." ^ At the 
same time, Paul reflects to some extent the influ- 
ence of his rabbinical training. This, however, 
instead of discredMmg Paul, should really accredit 
some elements of the rabbinical method of inter- 
pretation, and prove that there was a measure of 
truth in that method. 

76. In the Gospels (especially in Matthew and 
John) the words of pi-ophecy are usually applied 
with the distinct statement that this or that event 
took place ''in order that it might be fulfilled \^{ra 
nhiQodij^ hina jplerothee]^'^ In many of these 
cases the alleged purposes seem insignificant and 
incidental. For example, in Matt. ii. 15 the object 
of Christ's journey to Egypt is said to be '' that it 

1 Tholuck in Bibliotheca Sacra, Yol. xi. p. 597. 

2 Matt. i. 22; ii. 15; iv. 14; xxi. 4; Mark xiv. 49; John xii. 
38; xiii. 18; xix. 24, 28, 36. 



118 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord 
through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt did I 
call my Son.''^ In Matt. ii. 23 Christ's abode in 
Nazareth is said to have occurred '' that it might be 
fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, that 
he should be called a Nazarene." This merely 
expresses the idea conveyed in Isa. iv. 2 ; xi. 1 ; 
Jer. xxiii. 5 ; Zech. iii. 8 ; vi. 12, especially Isa. 
xi. 1, "There shall come forth a rod out of the 
stem of Jesse, and a Branch " ( ^^l iietzer) . Naza- 
reth derives its name from the same root. The name 
of the place was expressive of the conditions of 
Christ.^ But in Zechariah a different Avord (^^?, 
tsemacli) is translated "branch." The question 
is. Did these occurrences take place on purpose to 
fulfil the words of the prophet, or, as in Matt. ii. 
23, are the words chosen in part to round out a 
paronomasia? The most satisfactory answer is, 
That from the divine point of vicAV the full design 
or final cause of an event is never a single use to 
which it is put, but the sum of all the uses to 
which it is ever put. The incidental advantages 
of a plan are a part of its warrant. The many 
and minute parallelisms between the Old Testa- 
ment and the history of Christ were, Ave may 
I)elieve, designed for the sake of the evidence they 
furnish to the supernatural character of the revela- 
tion. We need not hesitate, then, in givin<^ tV«, Jdna 
1 Ilosea xi. 1. ^ ge^ John i. 46. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 119 

(in order thiit) , its natural sense as expressing a 
purpose. God purposed the salvation of the world 
through these means. These means were correlated 
to the future demands of men for evidence. On 
the other hand, there can be no question that the 
Greek word tV«, hina^ had in New Testament times 
lost much of its old purposive force, and is often 
to be translated so tliat^ instead of in order that; 
as, for example, in John ix. 2, where the question 
is asked, ^^ Who did sin, this man, or his parents, 
that \Jiina~\ he should be born blind?" Here it is 
clear that the speakers did not mean to say that 
the design of the sin was to produce blindness, 
but simply that the blindness was the residt of sin. 
From attention to this usage of the word hina 
many of the difficulties connected with the use of 
this formuhi disappear. But, as just remarked, 
the difficulties are really not so serious as is often 
alleged. The fulfilment of prophecy is multifari- 
ous, and the speaker who alleges a fulfilment in a 
particular case does not necessarily assert that the 
whole intent of the prophecy was limited to that 
particular event. 

Matt. i. 22, 23, from Isa. vii. 14, presents more 
difficulties than almost any other quotation. The 
occurrence of the word Traodu'o;, parthenos (virgin), 
in Matthew, and in the Septuagint of Isaiah, shows 
that the evangelist regards the quotation as a true 
prophecy; j^et verses 15 and 16 seem to show 



120 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

that the prophecy was spoken of some virgin then 
living and of a fulfilment in the immediate future. 
The probable explanation is that which regards 
the person in whom the prophecy was immediately 
fulfilled as a type of Christ. This he was in many 
ways, especially in his relation to those times of 
depression.^ 

John xii. 15 (Zech. ix. 9) was a remarkable 
symbolic occurrence. The Old Testament taught 
Israel to expect a king. The genealogical tables 
show that Christ was the rightful heir to David's 
throne. On the occasion referred to he was now 
hailed as king, but was mounted not upon a 
horse, which Avas an emblem of war ,2 but upon an 
ass, w^hich was the animal usually ridden in times 
of peace. 

But we need not multiply instances. Christ, 
Paul, and the evano^elists aoTee in reo-ardino: the 
Old Testament as the fruitful soil in which the 
New has its roots ; but the fruit has a value far 
above that of the chemical elements of which it is 
composed. The Old Testament and the New form 
an organic w^hole, whose chief value consists in 
the combination and adjustment of the elementaiy 
parts. 

77. At first sight three of the quotations in 



1 But see Fairbairn's Hermeneutical Manual, p. 456. 

2 See Hosea xiv. 3; Prov. xxi. 31; Jer. xvii. 25. 



INTERPKETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 121 

Hebrews seem without warrant in their applica- 
tion ; viz. i. 6, 10-12; ii. 13. 

a. Heb. i. 6 is from Ps. xcvii. 7. One would 
not infer from the Psalm that it had a Messianic 
import. It is addressed to Jehovah ; and all the 
gods, 6?oAm ( t^^rii?^ ) , are called upon to worship 
him. Here, as in some other places, ^^^^-^, is 
translated by the Septuagint " angels," and this 
version is followed by the writer. This translation 
of elohim by " angels " occurs several times in the 
Septuagint.^ ndhv (again) in this verse is also 
hard to explain, unless one holds to an introduction 
of Christ into the world before the incarnation. 

b. Heb. i. 10-12 introduces Ps. cii. 25-27 as 
said of the Son ; but in the original there is no 
intimation whatever of such an application. 

c. Heb. ii. 13 is from 2 Sam. xxii. 3 and Isa. 
viii. 17, 18. Here the prophet seems to be the 
speaker. It certainly is only by introducing the 
typical sense that it can be applied to Christ. 

In general, w^e may say of the application of the 
Old Testament quotations to Christ in the first two 
chapters of Hebrews, that they must reflect the 
view prevailing in the apostolic church concerning 
the exalted dignity of Christ's nature. The writer 
confidently assumes that these applications will be 
accepted by his readers. In Heb. i. 8, 9 ("But 

1 See Job xx. 15; Ps. viii. 5 (quoted in Heb. ii. 7); xcvi. 5; 
[English Bible xcvii. 7] exxxviii. 1. 



122 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for 
ever and ever ; and the sceptre of uprightness is 
the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved 
righteousness, and hated iniquity ; therefore 
God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the 
oil of gladness above thy fellows ") the appli- 
cation of Ps. xlv. 6, 7 to Christ is in accord- 
ance with the Jewish interpretation of the pas- 
sage. The first verse could be applied to the king- 
only in a typical sense ; and yet kings were called 
"gods " because of their official position. In Heb. 
i. 13 the Messianic application of Ps. ex. 1 is clear 
and natural ; so also in Heb. vii. 17 the Messianic 
reference of Ps. ex. 4 is striking and appropriate 
if the typical view of prophecy be maintained. Even 
the names of ]\Ielchizedek and Salem are made to 
contain a prophecy ; ^ as is also the omission in 
Genesis to o-ive Melchizedek's o'enealoay. In the 
eleventh chapter of Hebrews the whole history of 
Israel is made S3^mbolic.'^ In Heb. iv. 3-5, 9, 
10, from Ps. xcv. 11, the Sabbath is made typical 
of God's eternal rest to which Israel is invited. 

We cannot resist tne conclusion that the writer s 
mode of interpreting all these Old Testament pas- 
sages indicates the views of the apostolic church 
regarding inspiration. Altogether, the Book of 

1 Heb. vii. 2, 3. 

2 See verses 9, 10 (dwelling in tents); verses 13-lG (strangers 
and pilgrims). 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 123 

Hebrews is a fitting development and consumma- 
tion of the apostolic views foreshadowed and par- 
tially developed, ^?'6f^, by Christ ; second, by Paul ; 
tJiird, by the evangelists, concerning the Old Tes- 
tament as typical throughout of the new dispensa- 
tion. The relation of these Testaments cannot be 
accidental. The harmony is too profound to have 
been produced by designing men as an after- 
thought. The Old Testament history and literature 
had a fulness of meaning that could have been 
impressed upon it only by divine design. Its 
true explanation and interpretation are found only 
in the New. 

78. This pregnant character of much of the 
language of Scripture serves both to confirm the 
theory of the inspiration of the Bible and to relieve 
the theory from many apparent objections. The 
human architects of the Old Testament often 
builded better than they knew, as Caiaphas, the 
high-priest,^ in saying that it was expedient "that 
one man should die for the people, and that the 
Avhole nation perish not," was the unwitting author 
of a prophec}^ Clearly, also, it was not the object 
of Christ to make everything as plain as A B C. 
He evidently aimed to arouse the curiosity of his 
hearers ; and, while brinaino- truth within their 
reach, still kept it so far out of sight that it should 
be obtained only as the reward of honest purpose 

1 John xi. 50. 



124 THE DIVINE AUTHOEITY OF THE BIBLE. 

and diligent search. He everywhere recognized 
the niond freedom of his hearers and the depend- 
ence of their intellectual attainments upon self- 
exertion. Thus in God's revelation in the Bible, 
as well as in nature, we find due recognition of the 
fact that the search after truth has as real value as 
the truth itself, and that the value of the truth lies 
in no small degree in the stimulus it supplies to 
men to search for it. It is on this principle that 
Christ spoke in parables,^ ^U)ecause seeing they 
see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do 
they understand." 

Another reason for this mode of speech is that 
no divine truth in its fulness can be instanta- 
neously revealed. Our powers of apprehension 
are limited, and we cannot grasp all truth at once. 
We see in part and understand in part. Our 
apprehensions of divine truth may be correct with- 
out being exhaustive. We mtxyjind God without 
Jinding him out. For example, many words of 
Christ were at first imperfectly understood by his 
disciples. They became clear only as seen in the 
light of subsequent events. " Destroy this temple, 
and in three days I will raise it up,"^ had a deeper 
meaning than that attril)uted to it by his hearers. 
" And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all 
men unto myself,"^ has fuller significance to ns of 
this generation than to those of any previous {x^yq, 

1 Matt. xiii. 13. '-^ John ii. 10. ^ john xii. 32. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 125 

Every missionary conquest is increasing the cer- 
tainty and enlarging the fuhiess of the glorious 
promise. The prophecy of the destruction of 
Jerusalem in Matt. xvi. and xxiv. is so projected 
upon the background of the great judgment-day as 
to give a foreshortened view of all God's judg- 
ments from the time the words were uttered to the 
consummation of all things ; and these prophecies 
of the second coming of Christ are connected with 
such admonitions^ that the fanaticisms so often 
connected with their interpretation have been 
needless, except as they were providentially useful 
in enforcing upon later generations the duty of 
caution and humihty in the interpretation of divine 
lano:uao'e. 

This recognition by Christ of types and prophe- 
cies and pregnant utterances in the Old Testa- 
ment is not only indispensable to the discern- 
ment of that fulness of meaning and sublimity 
of thought necessary to give consistency to the 
whole scheme of salvation, but is important as 
setting limits to our own tendency to employ 
typical and allegorical and spiritualizing methods 
of interpretation. Where Christ and the apostles 
have found a type, or an allegory, or a pregnant 
construction in the Old Testament, w^e may follow 
them with confidence ; but beyond the limits set 
by their example in the use of these modes of 
1 Matt. xxiv. 



126 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

interpretation it becomes us to proceed with 
caution. 

Tlie same is true concerning para1)les. Christ 
emploj^ed parables for instruction with the greatest 
of success. But it was because he spoke with 
aiithoritij , It is a significant fact that no one else 
has ever been able to add to the stock of human 
knowledge while speaking in parables. The use 
of parables implies a subtle correspondence be- 
tween the works of God in nature and his works 
in grace ; but the correspondence is so subtle that 
no one but He who spake as never man spake, has 
ever entered the field alone without becoming en- 
tangled in the mazes of profitless speculation and 
fantasy. It were well for the church if, in inter- 
preting parables, her teachers had more nearly 
accepted the expositions of Christ himself as their 
models. 

79. Another example illustrating the impor- 
tance of interpreting Scripture by Scripture, is of 
too much moment to pass unnoticed. In 1 Thess. 
iv. 15, 17 Paul is understood by a large number 
of modern commentators as saying, that he him- 
self expected to be alive at Christ's second coming 
to judge the world, and this is represented as an 
argument against the perfect trustworthiness of 
n[)ostolic teachings. The words upon which this 
nllogation is based are as follows : ^'^^^"For this we 
sny unto you by the word of the Lord, that we 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 127 

that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the 
Lord, shall in no wise precede them that are fallen 
asleep. . . . ^^^Uhen we that are alive, that are 
left, shall together with them be caught up in the 
clouds, to meet the Lord in the air : and so shall 
we ever be with the Lord." The opinion that Paul 
expected to witness the end of the world and the 
resurrection before he died, is based on the clause 
reading, '^ We that are alive, that are left unto the 
coming of the Lord," where, at the first glance, 
one would say that Paul, by classing himself wdth 
those that are left, definitely expected that the 
resurrection would occur during; his lifetime. 
Again, in Phil. iv. 5, it is said that "the Lord is 
at hand,'' and, in 1 Peter iv. 7, that "the end of 
all things is at hand" ; while in 1 Cor. xv. 51, the 
apostle uses the first person plural, and seems again 
to class himself with those who shall not sleep, but 
shall be changed at the last trump. It cannot be 
denied, also, that in the early church there was a 
widespread expectation of '' the speedy return of 
Christ." This expectation, however, was based 
not merely on the words of apostles, but on the 
reported language of Christ himself.^ 

It should be noted that the strictures just 
referred to bear not merely against the authority 
of Paul, but against the authority of Christ him- 
self as reported by the evangelists. The appear- 

1 Matt. xvi. 28 and parallel passages; xxiv. 34; John xxi. 22. 



128 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

ance of error, however, disappears when the whole 
field is surveyed, and the sacred writers are allowed 
to interpret themselves. Some principles checking 
and guiding us in the interpretation of their words, 
will be duly illustrated in future remarks upon the 
necessary brevity of Scripture^ giving rise to ap- 
parent discrepancies in the narrative ; and upon the 
freedom of expression allowable in transferring 
the thought of the Old Testament into Ihe words of 
the New; and, indeed, are apparent in what has 
just now been said respecting the pregnant mean- 
ing frequently belonging to the fticts and words 
employed m divine revelation. That these prin- 
ciples are applicable here is evident enough from 
the nature of the case. The clause, *^ we that are 
alive, that are left," is not a formal statement 
directly asserting that some of them would cer- 
tainly be alive and be left, but is a statement 
adapted to any time in the indefinite future when 
the event referred to should occur and find Chris- 
tians living. ^^ We that are alive " is equivalent 
to the general expression, ^'all believers who are 
living at that time," which would include the 
speaker if he were then living. Secondly, in such 
phrases as "the Lord is at hand," we are bound to 
remember that man's estimate of periods of time 
must be relative. When projected upon the back- 
ground of eternity, a thousand j^ears become as a 

^ See chapter x. 



INTERrRETATION OF SCKIPTURE. 129 

day and a day as a thousand years.i Thirdly, the 
coming of the Lord is most likely a compound 
fact, including in the vision of the holy seer such 
all-important (to those who are specially concerned) 
providential events as the advent of death to the 
individual, the calamities connected with the de- 
struction of Jerusalem (which closed the old dis- 
pensation), as well as the consummation of earthly 
history in the final judgment. But, fourthly, Paul 
himself should be allowed to interpret his own 
language, and in 2 Thess. ii. 2, 3 (written only a 
short time afterwards) he expressly intimates that 
either his readers had misunderstood his words or 
had been imposed upon by a forged letter : ^-^ " Be 
not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be 
troubled, either by spirit, or by word, or by Epistle 
as from us, as that the day of the Lord is no?/; 
present; ^^^let no man beguile you in any wise : 
for it ivill not be, except the falling away come first, 
and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdi- 
tion." 

The passages in the New Testament seeming to 
teach that the second coming of Christ was to 
occur within a few years, should be interpreted so 
as to be consistent with everything else said in the 
Bil)le, and especial I3' by the same writers upon the 
subject. We believe in the inspired word, not in 
every confident interpreter of that word. When 
2 Peter iii. 8. 



130 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

an interpreter affirms that Matthew xxiv. contains 
erroneous teachino^ concernino; the time of the 
second coming of Christ, we are inclined to ask 
for the grounds of confidence upon which the in- 
terpreter bases his views. The interpreter is con- 
fident either that Christ was in error or that the 
evangelist misreported him. But in order to make 
this assertion he must be well assured of his own 
interpretation of the words. On the contrary, we 
distrust the confident dogmatism of those who 
affirm error here either in the teaching of Christ or 
in the report of the evangelists. The principles of 
interpretation revealed in the preceding paragraphs, 
and fully employed by Christ and the apostles, give 
ample warrant for that interpretation of the second 
coming of Christ which sees in it both type and 
antitype, and which recognizes the coming of 
Christ for judgment not only in the culminating 
crises of individual, social, and national life, but 
also in a final consummation of the history of the 
Avorld, — these inferior crises being in their measure 
true specimens and representatives of the final 
catastrophe. 

80. It may seem to some that, in presenting 
the subject occupying the preceding paragraphs 
first, we have reversed the natural order, having 
put that at the beginning of our remarks upon the 
interpretation of the Bible which is the consum- 
mate fruit of prolonged and tedious processes of 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 131 

study. This is, however, the order in which we 
are all compelled to approach the subject. No 
man brought up in a Christian land can divest 
himself of prepossessions regarding Christianity. 
And while it is important for the student to prove 
all things, it is a matter of economy to pay great 
respect to the opinions already in possession of the 
field, and to secure correct knowledge in the first 
place, as to what those opinions are, and in the 
second place, as to the arguments by which they are 
supported. For purposes of investigation such a 
provisional acceptance of the results obtained by 
the work of former scholars, and practically veri- 
fied by the abundant experience of the church, is 
of great advantage. The presumption is pretty 
strong that these results are in the main correct. 
Such confidence in the results of former investiofa- 
tion and experience gives steadiness also to our 
purposes while subjecting minor portions of the 
argument to the keen scrutiny of tentative criti- 
cism. We will therefore now take a rapid glance 
at some of the processes by which we approach 
the full meaning of the Bible and obtain at each 
step an authoritative view of its significance. 

81. It is necessary at the outset for the inter- 
preter to have an mtelligent confidence in the text 
of Scripture which he endeavors to interpret. As 
already remarked, however, there is so nearly a 
general consent of specially qualified textual critics 



132 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

to the genuineness of ninety-nine one-hundredths 
of the Bible that the textual uncertainty is reduced 
to very small limits, and, if we choose, we may set 
aside these uncertain points, and have undisputed 
possession of nearlj^ the whole field. Perhaps 
there is also need of emphasizing the fact that, even 
without a knowledge of the original languages, the 
Eno-lish reader has a sufficient varietv of transla- 
tions to form a safe judgment as to the main doc- 
trines of Christianity. The dependence of the 
English reader upon translations is not altogether 
different from that of the ordinary Greek or 
Hebrew scholar upon the biblical critics and lexi- 
cographers. The student of the original languages 
of Scripture w^ho is led by the knowledge given in 
this study to devote a large part of his time to 
solving the more intricate prol)lems in textual criti- 
cism and interpretation, is in imminent danger of 
missing the main point, and of tithing mint, anise, 
and cummin, to the neglect of the weightier mat- 
ters of the law. 

Accepting intelligently the text before him 
the interpreter proceeds to ascertain the meaning 
of the individual words and sentences composing 
the volume. In this examination the investigator 
at once perceives that there is no cast-iron rigidity 
to laniruao'e. The dictionarv and the o^rammar do 
not weigh Avords for us, as tlie apothecary w^eighs 
medicine ; nor is the stamp by which meaning is 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 133 

impressed upon words of the same character with 
that at the mint which leaves its impress upon coin. 
This fact concerning language is of twofold signifi- 
cance. In the first place, it makes a demand upon 
the patience of the interpreter in comparing with 
one another the various passages of the literature in 
which a word occurs, in order to ascertain for him- 
self what peculiarities usage has impressed upon it. 
The etymology of a word and its original import 
count for little as compared with its use in con- 
temporary literature. The lexicon gives us the 
opinion of the lexicographer as to the meaning of 
a word. That, however, is only an opinion formed 
by a more or less extensive examination of the 
passages in the literature where the word occurs. 
Every good lexicon contains abundant references 
to such passages and thus greatly facilitates our 
work. With the facilities thus afforded by the 
lexicons and grammars of the present day, it is a 
reasonably easy task to form by direct investiga- 
tion a correct and independent judgment as to the 
meaning of all the more important words in biblical 
literature. So this apparent indefiniteness of lan- 
guage need not seriously interfere with the cer- 
tainty of our opinions upon the main points of 
biblical teaching. 

82. Due appreciation of the elasticity of^words 
within moderate limits also enables us to correct a 
great number of the current assertions of inac- 



134 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

curacy in the Bible. The failure to appreciate 
the reasonable elasticity of words is what gives 
rise to the larger part of the objections arising 
from alleged discrepancies. The so-called mis- 
takes of the Bible can, for the most part, be shown 
to be in reality the mistakes of the interpreters. 

For example, the apparent discrepancy con- 
cerning the healing of the blind men near Jericho ^ 
probably disappears when the elastic usage of a 
single word engizein (iyyCceipy is considered. This 
word bears the translation ^' to be near," as well 
as that of "to come near," and is frequently so 
used in the Septuagint. In 1 Kings xxi. 2, for exam- 
ple, Ahab is said to have desired Nabolh's Vine3'ard 
because it was near unto his house (^/'/u^^^')- ^^^ 
that we are not compelled to understand Luke as 
saying that the miracle was performed as Chri^^t 
was first entering into the city.^ This, however, 
is but one mode of removing the apparent discrep- 
ancy, and is not without its difficulties,* the most 
serious of which is that Luke xix. 1 seems to say 
that afterwards Jesus entered into and went 
through Jericho. Any one, however, who at- 
temi)ts to write a brief, readable narrative will see 
how difficult it is to bring out everything in its 

1 Matt. XX. 29-34; Mark x. 46-52; Luke xviii. 35-i3. 

2 Luke xviii. 35. 

3 See Robinson's Hannony. 

'^ See Gardiner's Harmony, Andrews' Life of our Lord, and 
the commentators. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 135 

exact chronological order without both making the 
story dull and directing attention away from the 
main point by giving the chronological sequence 
more importance than rightfully belongs to it; 
hence, in rapid narrative, the necessity of fre- 
quently anticipating facts, and then referring to 
them in recapitulations. Let any one notice how 
often in narrating even simple events the thread of 
the story will carry him on beyond an important 
chronological point ; and in order to pick up the 
story again he must inject a word or two of reca- 
pitulation — sometimes explicitly adding the phrase 
"to go back a little," sometimes not. Due regard 
to the necessity of vivid narrative will remove 
all occasion for asserting a discrepancy in the 
record under consideration. 

83. By way of further illustration, we will con- 
sider perhaps the most serious discrepancy urged 
as existing between the statements of John and 
the other three evangelists. We refer to the 
question whether, on the evening before the cruci- 
fixion, Christ regularly ate the paschal supper 
with his disciples. The main facts are as follows : 
According to John xiii. 1 the Lord's Supper must 
have been instituted before the passover ; accord- 
ing to John xviii. 28, the Jews were expecting to 
eat the passover when Christ was crucified ; ac- 
cording to John xix. 14, the preparation of tlie 
passover was still in progress, and in verse 31 



136 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

John calls it "a high day''; whereas, according 
to the other evangelists,^ Jesus ate the passover 
with his disciples the evening before his arrest. 
Here seems to be a flat contradiction. But upon 
taking a closer view of the case, and examining 
more minutely into the meaning of the words, it 
appears that none of them have that cast-iron 
rigidity asserted l\y. those who insist upon the con- 
tradiction. In the first phice, we find from 
examining the literature of the subject that the 
word '^passover" was used Avith somcAvhat of the 
same freedom as the word "thanksgiving" may be 
in New England, or the word "tea" in general 
society. Kot long since the writer asked a friend 
if he would come to his house, at a certain time, 
and " take tea." The friend replied that he would, 
and it was reported in letters written the next day 
that he really did so. But when at the table this 
gentleman was asked if he would '^ take tea," he 
replied, "No, I thank 3^ou ; please let me have 
some warm Avater." So another member of the 
famih^ reported that this gentleman did not take 
tea at our house. If the letters containing these 
reports should be preserved for some future critic, 
they may give rise to an inconclusive discussion of 
the question, "Did the gentleman mentioned take 
tea or did he not take tea?" and such very likel\^ 
is the question before us respecting the fact of 

1 Matt. xxvi. 17-30; Mark xiv. 12-2G; Luke xxii. 1-20. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 137 

Christ's eating the passover with his disciples. 
At any rate, it would be very diflScult for those 
who urge the contradiction to prove that the ques- 
tion is very much more difficult of solution than 
the one presented in the illustration just given 
might be. An examination of the usage of the 
word "passover" shows that in some places it 
means the passover lamb itself, and "to eat the 
passover" means to eat the paschal lamb.^ In 
other places the word "passover" means the whole 
meal at which the paschal lamb was eaten, ^ as our 
word "tea" may refer to the whole meal at which 
tea is ordinarily served. Again, the word " pass- 
over" stands for the whole festival of the week in 
which the paschal lamb was slain. ^ Or again, 
"passover" may mean paschal sacrifices.* Again, 
the word " eat " in John xviii. 28 has an elasticity 
corresponding to "take" in the illustration just 
given. To '^ eat the passover" may very naturally 
have come to mean about the same as to "A;eep 
the passover" ; so it seems to be used in 2 Chron. 
XXX. 18, 22. Due consideration of the usage of 
the words employed in this whole account makes 
it impossible to affirm a contradiction here between 
John and the otlier evangelists. We can easily 

1 Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii. 7; 1 Cor. v. 7. 

2 Matt. xxvi. 18, 19; Luke xxii. 8, 13; Heb. xi. 28. 

3 Luke xxii. 1; Matt. xxvi. 2; John ii. 13; vi. 4. 

* Compare Ps. cxviii. 27; Ex, xxiii. 18; Mai, ii. 3; 2 Chron. 
XXX. 22. 



138 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

see that if we knew a little more than we do we 
miofht even be able to affirm an undesio-ned coin- 
cidence of great evidential value. 

84. The liability to such indefiniteness in the 
use of language as we have just alluded to, is 
inevitable. But, as candid consideration will 
show, the only emergencies in which it need lead 
to serious doubts are where the literature of the 
subject is scanty, and where efforts are made to 
force a many-sided doctrine into a single formal 
statement. The safety with which the doctrines 
and facts of the Bible have been preserved to the 
world is largely owing to the extent and variety of 
the literature in which they are preserved and 
urged upon the attention of the world, and the 
extent of the disagreement among the inter- 
I)reters of the Bible is often greath' magnified in 
popular statements. 

Undue emphasis is laid in many quarters upon 
the imperfection of language as a means of convey- 
ing thought, and the danger of error in relying upon 
proof-texts for the support of doctrine has been 
unduly dwelt upon. It is true that occasionally 
doctrines have been supported by proof-texts ^vhich 
w^ere entirely irrelevant. Still, the precise and 
definite words of the Bible are the best indexes we 
can have of the divine thoughts entering into the 
plan of salvation. Those who would erect along- 
side of the words of Scripture a co-ordinate au- 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 139 

thority variously called ''Christian faith," "Chris- 
tian consciousness," and " ethico-religious con- 
sciousness," are substituting shadows for substance, 
theories for facts, and ill-defined sentiments for the 
sure word of God. 

When we are tempted to think lightly of the 
verbal revelation left us in the Bible, it would be 
well for us to pause and reflect upon the extent to 
which, in all the relations of life, we are dependent 
upon Avords for the conveyance of rights and privi- 
leo;es. In the lano;uao:e of another: "There is no 
title that is not conveyed by words. The houses 
we live in, the clothes we wear, the food we eat — 
these are obtained for us by words. By words are 
the great institutions of mercj^ and education about 
us shaped. Here is a deed, for instance, endowing 
a hospital on certain trusts, and through the words 
of these trusts the donor transmits curative and 
soothing power to multitudes of sick and wounded 
brought within those beneficent gates. And here 
is a will giving an educational fund to a college, 
and through the words of this will, stream en- 
couragement and instruction to multitudes of poor 
scholars. Nor is this all. Bv words our ofreat 
political safeguards are constructed. The words 
of the habeas corpus statute operate, w^herever it is 
in force, to check arl)itrary arrests. The words 
of the Bill of Rights attached to the Constitution 
of the United States, and of its several amend- 



140 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

meiits, secure to each citizen of the United States 
protection in his civil relations ; and through these 
words flow what we may venture to call grace from 
the people collectively as the source of power to 
the people individually as the enjojxrs of rights. 
It is irrational, therefore, to denounce the Prot- 
estant view of the Bible as unduly assigning grace 
to words, when it is through the grace of words 
that we hold whatever rights we enjo}^ Yet, on 
the other hand, it is equally irrational to talk of 
the words in the sacred text as though they tran- 
scended criticism, w^ere insoluble by time, and 
operated mechanically and not dynamically. The 
divine revelation is just what we should suppose it 
would be, judging from the analogies of human law. 
Its words may sometimes be ambiguous. They are 
open to the modifications of time. There may be 
always a question as to what objects they apply. 
Yet through these words grace flows." ^ 

85. The supposed modern improvements in the 
science of interpretation are to a considerable ex- 
tent illusory. There have been no discoveries re- 
lating to that science at all to be compared with 
the discoveries in astronomy and geology. The 
scholars of the sixteenth century knew the Greek 
about as well as we do of the nineteenth. Calvin 
is still one of the best of commentators. But no 

^ Rev. Francis Wharton, LL.D., in Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 
xl. p. 217. 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 141 

scientific man of his day, not even Copernicus, can 
be compared in his equipment with those of the 
present time. On the other hand, fifty-nine 
sixtieths of all the literature of the New Testa- 
ment was in the hands of the reformers of Calvin's 
time, and the characteristics of modern inter- 
pretation have been exemplified by enlightened 
scholars in all ages of church history. The 
enlightened interpreter considers Scripture (ac- 
cording to the modern formula) minutely, gram- 
matically, contextually , and historically. Nothing 
in a sentence, or a word even, is unw^orthy 
of careful attention from the interpreter. It 
will be remembered, for example, that when 
speaking of textual criticism instances were ad- 
duced in which the presence or absence of a single 
letter in a word produces marked results in the 
interpretation of a passage. Upon the presence or 
absence of the article before the w^ord for feast 
(eooTTi) in John v. 1, has been supposed to depend 
a whole year in the chronology of Christ's minis- 
try. Careful attention to the grammar is of course 
essential, in order to obtain the natural meaning 
of the language ; but, as already remarked, the 
meaning of the words themselves is largely de- 
pendent upon the context ; so that a consideration 
of the context becomes a matter of prime necessity. 
A word is as dependent upon the context for its 
shade of meaning as a house is upon its surround- 



142 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

ings for the appropriate style of architecture. In 
determining the meaning of a word a variety of 
considerations come in pkiy ; the general style of 
the writer must be considered, as well as the 
known nature of the subject to which the language 
is applied. In poetry, where the necessities of 
metre and rhyme, or, as in Hebrew, of the paral- 
lelisms of thought, come hito pla}^ the construc- 
tion of the language will be much less strict than 
in prose. We may expect the language of deep 
emotion to be figurative ; while the same words in 
narrative speech would bear to be taken more 
nearly in their literal sense. In short, the known 
nature of the subject — however the knowledge is 
obtained — necessitates important modifications in 
our understanding of the words employed ; that 
is, we assume that an intelligent writer would 
have his words interpreted with reference to all 
he is known to believe on the subject. If, for 
example, a man says, '^ Bring me the book," he 
means, bring it by some physical agency, because 
that is the only agency that can move a material 
object. If the judge says, "Bring the prisoner to 
the bar," his command involves the use of the 
motives that ordinarily control the movements of 
a prisoner. If a father says to his son, "Bring 
your friends to dinner," the use of physical force 
or of appeals to the fears of the friend, are ex- 
cluded from our thoughts by the known relations 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 143 

of the parties. There is a long list of words in 
the New Testament which became so magnetized 
by their contact with Christianity that the classic 
Greek would find it difficult to recognize their 
meaning. The writers of the New Testament 
were compelled to do what they themselves said 
could not be done, namely, to put new wine into 
old wine-skins without bursting the skins. To a 
greater extent than any other book, the words of 
the New Testament receive their meaning from a 
great historical movement. The writers were 
called upon to clothe the peculiar and sublime 
relio'ious thouoht of the Hebrews in the more 
decorous drapery of the Greek language. Yes, 
more than this ; they were compelled to provide 
language for unheard-of and supernatural doctrines 
now for the first time revealed. Let any one 
compare classic Greek with the Greek of the New 
Testament, and he cannot fail to be impressed by 
the enlargement in every dimension of thought 
which has taken place in such words as nioTig (faith), 
diitaioix) (to make righteous or to justify) , uyiog (holy), 
y.aXsLi^ (to call, from Avhich comes the word 
"elect"), uydn?] (love), ^^n(g (hope), x^Q^^ (grace), 

evayyehoi^ (gOSpel), y^v/ri (life), ^i]QvGaeiP (to preach), 
(jLTioaiolog (apostle), noeaBvjeqo; (elder), inlcrxoTio; 

(bishop), didxorog *(deacon), BaTniUiv (to baptize), 
}(oiPU)via (fellowship), ouo^ (flesh), omriQia (salva- 



144 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

tion), ^vtqovgOui (to redeem), xaiaDAaufiv (to recon- 
cile), nahyyevecr'ix (regeneration), ()pw; (light). 

All these words, and many others, have been 
unspeakably enriched and permanently enlarged in 
their meaning by their adoption into Christianity. 
The process by Avhich such words are transformed 
is familiar enough ; though it has never been illus- 
trated elsewhere upon so grand a scale. Unlike 
silver and gold, words are wholly dependent for 
their value upon the stamp which is on them, that 
is, usage determines the meaning of a word. 
Words have value and power in proportion to the 
nobility of the things to which they are habitually 
applied and to the importance of the connection in 
which they are habitually used. In far too many 
cases words which have come to have an exalted 
meaning gradually lose it, because the people 
using them are no longer performing noble deeds 
or cherishing noble objects of contemplation. It 
is thus that charity (as depicted in 1 Cor. xiii.), 
which in our own language signified the sum of all 
Christian virtue, has degenerated to signify that 
single form of benevolence in which we give money 
to relieve the wants of men. But, on the other 
hand, there are periods of history characterized by 
so many noble deeds that old words take on new 
meanings, and the whole language of a people be- 
comes instinct with new life. It is in such periods 
of historv that we witness the most remarkable 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 145 

outbursts of literary activity. But no other 
quickening of national life is to be compared in its 
effect on language, with that baptism of the Greek 
tongue which it received on the occasion of its 
contact with the ineflable realities connected with 
the incarnation of Christ and the outpouring of the 
Holy Spirit under the Christian dispensation. 

86. It is not, however, by any means always 
easy to define accurately the meaning of single 
terms and phrases ; for when taken out of their 
connection the w^ords often lose that lustre of re- 
flected light which belongs to them in connected 
discourse. The shade of meaninsr l)elono'ino' to a 
word can be determined only by considering the 
whole context. There are no absolute rules by 
which to demonstrate the meaning of a sentence, 
as one would the truth of an algebraic formula. 
To carry conviction as to the truth of any particu- 
lar interpretation we must depend upon the facts 
themselves, somewhat as we would convince an- 
other of the beauty of a statue by disclosing to his 
view the object itself. But even in this case some- 
thing more is necessary than the mere removing of 
a veil. To secure unanimity of judgment it is 
essential that the beholders have the same normal 
powders of vision, and have patience to look at the 
object w^ith the same degree of attention and the 
will to observe it from the same points of view. 
If one persists in examining a statue with a micro- 



146 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

scope and sounding it with a geological hammer, 
we need not be surprised if he fails to discover the 
beauty which another discerns who examines it 
from an artistic point of view. 

No one would care to disguise the fact that the 
Bible may be misapprehended; that it may be ex- 
auiined in such a way that its majestic power shall 
be undiscovered and its matchless beauty undis- 
cerned. The Bible is literature, and is instinct 
M ith livino- thouo;ht. The thought of a book, like 
the life of a plant or animal, cannot be obtained 
by dissection or chemical analysis. In these 
mechanical processes we destroy the subtile power 
of life that made it an organic whole. 

In dwelling thus, however, upon the danger of 
subjecting the words of Scripture to the mechani- 
cal processes of mere literal interpretation, we do 
not discredit the power of language to convey 
definite thought, and to preserve it in fixed forms 
as an heirloom to successive ages ; for such powei* 
it most certainly has, the Bible itself being, in fact, 
one of the most striking illustrations of the power 
of lano^uasfe to move the world. The difficult v 
encountered in this case is to hold the attention of 
individual students to the facts of the Bible con- 
sidered together and as a wdiole. 

As before remarked we are in great danger of 
overestimating the extent of disagreement between 
interpreters, and of underestimating the num))er 



n 



INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 147 

and importance of the points in which Christian 
believers are agreed. The history of the evangeli- 
cal portion of the church has revolved in a pretty 
narrow orbit about three cardinal doctrines of the 
Bible. The tendencies to aberration have, for the 
ofreat mass of believers, been from time to time 
counteracted, so that the heart of evangelical 
Christendom has remained true, and her faith in 
these three doctrines remained constant. During 
every age, however, there have been local com- 
panies of individuals who have strayed so far from 
the attracting power that they have gone off at a 
tangent, and, like the comets, become wandering 
orbs whose movements defy calculation. 

The three doctrines to which we refer are 1st. 
That God has made a special historical revelation 
to men, and that the Bible is the authoritative 
record of that revelation. 2d. That the incarna- 
tion and death of Christ are sacrificial in their 
character, and were necessary, as well in justifica- 
tion of God's action in foro'ivino; sin as in furnish- 
ing a moral power for securing the obedience of 
the individual sinner. 3d. That this Avorld is the 
arena on which human beings determine the condi- 
tions of their (wistence for an endless futurity. 
Apart from these doctrines there has been little 
evangelical activity in the world. 

87. An important question upon which Protes- 
tants and Catholics differ relates to the intelligibility 



148 THE JJIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

of the Bible, both aaTeeins: that the real teachino^ 
of the Bible upon moral and religious questions is 
without error. But the Catholic maintains that a 
special body of divinely aided interpreters (of 
which the pope is now the representative) is essen- 
tial to the discover}^ and exposition of the Scrip- 
tures ; whereas, Protestants insist on placing the 
Bible in the hands of the common people, — 
havins: confidence that the ireneral i^^ood sense of 
those who read, as it is aided by the free discus- 
sion of scholars, the divinely ordered progress of 
events, and the pervasive witness of the Holy 
Spirit, will obtain a sufficient understanding of it 
to secure not only individual salvation, but their 
growth in grace and their preparation for attaining 
all the high purposes of their spiritual calling. That 
portions of the Scriptures have been grossly mis- 
understood, and perverted to ignoble and unworthy 
uses, is no more proof of inherent fallibility than 
are the perversions to which the laws of nature are 
subject. It is a part of our moral trial in this 
world to wait patiently while exercising all our 
powers to ascertain what is the will of God as ex- 
pressed both in nature and the Bible. If a stone 
has proved to us a stone of stumbling, it is to 
teach us to step higher and walk more carefully. 
If a portion of Scripture has conveyed to us a false 
impression, and been perverted to sustain us in our 
adherence to false doctrine, it is to teach us a 



INTEKPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 149 

lesson in humility. We are not to suppose that the 
few things of which we are assured in the present 
low stage of our development exhaust the teachings 
of the Bible, or that the unexplored remnants of 
Scripture have yielded all their treasure. 

But what, as Protestants, we do hold is that the 
Bible is the word of God, and is the revelation in 
human lano;ua2:e to which we must o^o for the doc- 
trines which are the basis of all our Christian 
activity ; and that by its teachings we are to test 
all our religious theories and hold in check all our 
moral speculations. To those who put forward 
with special authority their ethico-religious con- 
sciousness, we say, in the language of the prophet 
when speaking of the utterances of those who in 
his time professed communion with spirits, "To 
the law and to the testimony : if they speak not 
according to this word it is because there is no 
lio;ht in them." ^ In submittino^ to the o-uidance of 
the Bible we are doing what the scientific man 
does, who subordinates his theories to the facts of 
nature. Those facts may be diflBcultof interpreta- 
tion but they are realities, and yield the truth so 
far as he understands them ; while their hidden 
meanino; is ever beckonino* him on to further in- 
vestio-ation into the real nature of thino-s. The 
difference between the interpreter who acknowl- 
edges the Bible as supreme authority and the one 

1 Isa. viii. 20. 



150 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

who exalts his own ethico-religious consciousness 
to that place of authority is about the same as that 
between the sea-captain who takes his bearings 
from the stars and the one who guides his course 
by the light upon his own masthead. 



SUMMARY OF THE POSITIVE ARGUMENT. 151 



VIII. 

SUMMARY OF THE POSITIVE ARGUMENT. 

88. So far it has been our object to bring into 
one view the positive arguments which convince a 
believer in the Bible of its inspiration and divine 
authority. The arguments for its divine authority 
are drawn chiefly from the Bible itself, and will 
have little weight with those who do not accept the 
general credibility of the book. To the believer 
in the authenticity of the Bible, however, the con- 
siderations presented ought to be conclusive ; for 
the authenticity of the Bible is bound up with its 
inspiration. 

We would not, however, be understood as 
aflSrming that there are no diflSculties in the Avay 
of those who receive the Bible as of divine author- 
ity throughout. We do not accept the inspiration 
of the Bible under the delusion, that everything 
pertaining to the subject can be made perfectly 
clear ; but rather we feel warranted in accepting 
the ordinary doctrine of inspiration as here set 
forth, because the difficulties connected Avith that 
theory are so small and so few in comparison with 



152 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

those encountered upon any other theory. It is 
easier to reject the supernatural claims of Chris- 
tianity entirely than to accept those claims, and 
call ourselves Christians, while attempting to ex- 
plain away as of little meaning the remarkable 
lano^uaofe of the sacred Avriters concernino; them- 
selves. The part of a reasonable man in such a 
situation is, to move onward with confidence in the 
line of least resistance, and, if difficulties meet 
him, to fortify his assurance by reflecting how 
much greater difficulties would be encountered in 
any other direction. 

89. Briefly stated, the evangelical theory of 
the inspiration of the Bible rests upon the fourfold 
fact : a. That Christianity is essentially super- 
natural, involving the incarnation of the Second 
Person of the divine Trinity, and his miracu- 
lous entrance into, and miraculous exit from, the 
world. This removes antecedent objections, b. It 
is appropriate and important, not to say necessary, 
that the record of such a divine intervention in 
history should be adequate, and free from essential 
error, lest the intervention itself should fail to ac- 
complish its end. This makes the fact of in- 
spiration antecedently probable, c. Such emphatic 
promises of assistance w^ere given by Christ to the 
apostles and their associates, upon whom would 
come the responsibility of recording the facts and 
unfolding the doctrines essential to Christianity, 



SUMMARY OF THE POSITIVE ARGUMENT. 153 

that we look to find these promises fulfilled in the 
writings of the apostles, d. The repeated asser- 
tion by certain of the writers of the New Testa- 
ment, that they wrote by divine authority, coupled 
with the fact that in all their writings and conduct 
they both assume and assert that the Old Testa- 
ment is the inspired word of God, compels us to 
accept large portions of the New Testament as in- 
spired or reject it altogether. The opinion of the 
Old Testament entertained by the writers of the 
New, becomes the standard by which we are to 
measure the estimate set upon the books of the 
New Testament by the primitive church. We can- 
not suppose that the churches of the first and 
second centuries could accord a lower place to the 
books which they accepted as containing the 
authoritative accounts of Christian fact and doc- 
trine, written by the apostles and their associates 
under the conditions we have described, than was 
accorded to the Old Testament Scriptures. 

90. Some may think that too great weight is 
given to the testimony of the churches of the first 
and second centuries concerning the authority of 
the books of the New^ Testament. A little reflec- 
tion, however, will show that the churches of the 
first and second centuries were the proper judges 
and the natural guardians of the earliest Christian 
records, and that the testimony which they have 
borne to the records we have is not easily contra- 



154 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

dieted or disturbed. During the first two centuries 
of the Christian era, the traditional knowledge of 
the facts and doctrines of Christianity must have 
been remarkably fresh ; so that the churches could 
then judge, as no one at a later day would be able 
to do, whether the purported documents claiming 
authoritative recognition agreed with the testimony 
and preaching with which the original churches 
were familiar. The teachers of Justin Mart}^^ of 
Irenaeus, and of Clement of Alexandria, were the 
contemporaries of some of the apostles ; and the 
majority of the books of the New Testament are 
witnessed to by these three great writers and their 
contemporaries of the second centurjs as worthy 
of unquestioned confidence and as being actually 
received as such by the churches of their time. 
The be'lievers of that period appeal to those books 
and quote them wdth the same deference with 
w^hich both Jews and Christians treated the Old 
Testament. 

91. It is no slight confirmatory evidence of the 
authority of the books of the New Testament as 
we now have it, that in intrinsic character they 
stand so far above all other literature of their time. 
They really have no competitors. The apocryphal 
Gospels are silly and puerile in the extreme, teach- 
ing no important moral lessons, revealing no im- 
portant truth, and abounding in miracles utterly 
foreign to the spirit and dignity of the Gospels. 



SUMMARY OF THE POSITIVE ARGUMENT. 155 

The Epistles of Clement and Barnabas bear no 
comparison, in point of intrinsic excellence, with 
the Epistles of Paul, Peter, James, and John. 

92. The doubts and hesitancy through which 
several of the books of the New Testa^^ient 
obtained general recognition from the churches, 
increase rather than diminish our confidence in 
the final decision ; for it shows that the early Chris- 
tians were not inclined to act in so weighty a mat- 
ter, except upon the best of evidence. Before the 
close of the fourth century of the present era 
entire unanimity was attained by the churches in 
recognizing the authority of all the present books 
of the New Testament. Before the bes^innino; of 
the third century, or within one hundred years of 
the death of the apostle John, there was entire 
agreement throughout the churches in accepting as 
authoritative the larger part of the New Testa- 
ment ; Avhile the hesitancy manifested in some 
quarters about accepting a part of the remainder is 
matched by abundant positive testimony to the ac- 
ceptance in other quarters. 

93. We do not dispute the right of any one to 
attempt to reverse the judgment of the primitive 
church concerning books admitted into the New 
Testament ; but Ave insist, that such a one shall 
recognize the difficulty of his undertaking. To 
come into court after sixteen hundred years have 
elapsed, and attempt to reverse the decision ren- 



156 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

dered by the jury when the facts were fresh, w^hen 
evidence was accessible, and when the truth was 
accepted at the hazard of one's life, requires no 
small deofree of self-assurance. Such reversal of 
judgipent can be secured only on the discovery 
of very cogent evidence. To us the difficulties of 
explaining away the evidence ascribing to the Old 
and New Testaments in their sphere infallible 
authority, seem insuperable. The argument en- 
dures every scientific test that can be applied to 
the subject, and the case seems proved, unless we 
discard the whole idea of a supernatural interven- 
tion, and consider Christianity as resting through- 
out upon a delusion. 

We will turn now to consider more at length 
some of the difficulties which lie in the way of 
accepting the doctrine that the Scriptures are, 
throughout, the product of divine inspiration, and 
to answer in detail some of the objections which 
with more or less force are urged against the 
doctrine. 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 157 



IX. 

INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 

94. Many of the objections urged against the 
doctrine of inspiration are inherent in the nature 
of the subject, and arise from attempting to define 
the mode of inspiration more minutely than we are 
authorized to do. In this, as in other matters, we 
have, as before remarked, far more practical in- 
terest in the end secured than in the process 
through which it is attained, and we should be 
cautious about attempting to limit God in the man- 
ner of his operations. The revelation of the In- 
finite Being to his creatures and his manifestation 
in time and space, involve essential mysteries which 
the human mind may not hope to fathom. 

95. The doctrine that the Bible is the word of 
God throughout, and that in all its parts it is the 
product of that special divine forethought and ac- 
tivity comprehensively styled "inspiration," in- 
volves almost exactly the same difficulties with the 
doctrine that nature is the product of design, and 
is throughout a revelation of divine wisdom. In 
recent times we have enlaroed beyond measure our 



158 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

knowledge of the mode by which God works to 
accomplish his designs in nature ; and there has 
been a pretty widespread apprehension that, upon 
the discovery of the processes or the laics of nature, 
we shall lose the idea of the design in nature. 
The futility of such fears Ave have elsewhere 
shown. ^ As a brilliant essayist has remarked,^ 
" It is a singular fact, that whenever we find out 
how anything is done our conclusion seems to be 
that God did not do it." 

96. It is an unpardonable error, however, to 
assume that God's designs cannot be accomplished 
by more recondite and indirect methods than those 
which would be pursued by men. God makes a 
horse by a much more roundabout and complicated 
process than is pursued by a mechanic in making a 
clock. The discovery of the vast distances of the 
stars from us, and that the phenomena of the 
seasons and of day and night are produced by 
movements of the earth rather than by the revolu- 
tion of the heavens, and that the courses of the 
heavenly orbs are determined by the law of gravi- 
tation, and that God's designs are far more com- 
prehensive than was formerly supposed, should 
enlarge our conception of God's power and wisdom 
rather than diminish our sense of his nearness to us. 

1 See the author's Logic of Christian Evidences, pp. 73-122, 
and Studies in Science and Religion, pp. 1G5-255. 

2 Frances Power Cobbe. 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 159 

97. A line of remark similar to the foregoing 
is eminently appropriate respecting the doctrine 
of the inspiration of Scripture. We should not 
embarrass ourselves with any theory of inspiration 
based lai'gely upon the et^ mology of the word. 
When we speak of Scripture as ^' inspired," or 
" God-breathed," we are using language after the 
manner of men, and the word should receive that 
modification of meaning Avhich all words have when 
made to describe the beino; or the actions of God. 
The evidence of inspiration adduced in the pre- 
ceding chapters bears upon the end secured rather 
than upon the divine method of attaining the end. 
In old times God spoke unto the fixthers through 
the prophets, "by divers portions and in divers 
manners."^ We are not seriously concerned with 
the question whether a portion of Scripture is 
made authoritative by the direct suggestion of the 
Spirit to the writer, or by a superintendence which 
keeps the writer from incorporating what is essen- 
tially erroneous and misleading. The important 
question is, Is the Bi1:)le perfect as related to the 
end it lias in view? viz. to provide the world with 
a permanently adequate, authoritative, and intelli- 
gible historical record of the supernatural revela- 
tion of himself made in connection with the 
incarnation of Christ? In thus viewing the ques- 
tion we shall find little difficulty in understanding 

1 Heb. i. 1. 



160 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

the subject, so far as our duty and welfare are 
concerned. 

98. Doubtless God has an indefinite variety of 
ways by which to secure the perfection which 
characterizes the Scriptures of the Old and New 
Testaments. A part of the perfection of these 
writings for their designed purpose must have been 
secured by direct suggestion, illumination, and 
revelation ; while upon their human side, as adapted 
to finite apprehension, much of the perfection of 
Scrii)ture consists in the purely natural and human 
elements which have been incorporated and adopted 
as a part of the instrument of divine revelation. 
In this respect the Bible ma}' be compared to the 
person of Christ, which combines in mysterious 
union both human and divine elements. It has 
always been a matter of diflSculty, in forming a 
conception of Christ's nature, to keep one of these 
elements from overshadowing or al)sorbing the 
other. In contemplating the divine element of 
Christ's nature the humanity is in danger of fading 
from our vision. It was, for example, the doctrine 
of theDoketoe — an heretical sect which flourished 
toward the close of the second century — that 
'' Christ had no real body ; his appearance in the 
actual world Avas only a magical apparition, his 
))odya phantom, his birth and death, visions."^ 
Eepresentatives of this heretical genus, which so 

^ Schaff-IIerzog Encycloi)8edia, artich' Doketisni. 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 161 

exalts the divine as to abolish* the human, and so 
conceives of the infinite as to render the finite im- 
possible, appear in the history of the doctrine of 
inspiration. Certain theologians in the latter part 
of the seventeenth, and the beginning of the 
eighteenth, century — of whom the Buxtorfs, the 
Carpzovs, and Quenstedt, are representatives — 
compared the sacred writers to pens or flutes, 
thus rendering their personality absolutely quies- 
cent, and making the human element in the Scri})- 
tures a direct product of divine action. 

99. On the other hand, as w^e are inclined to 
reject the divinity of Christ when contemplating 
his humanity, so w^e are in danger of eliminating 
the conception of a pervasive divine element from 
Scripture. As Christ would not have been God 
manifest in the flesh except his humanity had been 
perfect, so the Bible would not be the word of God 
except there were a purely human element in it, 
to wdiich the divine word has l)ecome indissolubly 
joined. Our theory of inspiration, therefore, 
simply involves the perfection of the Bible for its 
designed purpose, which is, as already remarked, 
to give to the world a permanent, adequate, intelli- 
gible, and authoritative written revelation of relig- 
ious truth. As such we receive it on the strength 
of the positive evidence already presented. 

We wnll now attend to the objections urged 
against this view of the Bible ; and the reader is 



162 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

asked to consider whether the difficulties in the 
Avay of accepting the Bible as the inspired word 
of God are not far less than those involved in the 
rejection of its inspiration, compelling us to ex- 
plain away all the evidence heretofore presented. 
100. Before considering more in detail the 
reality of the discrepancies of various sorts so 
freely alleged to exist in the Bible, it is well to 
remind ourselves again that a considerable amount 
of seeming error in the Bible is eliminated by 
scientific criticism of the text, and so is shown to 
belong to the transcribers, and not to the original 
writers. A still larger portion of seeming errors 
is the result of unscientific habits of interpretation. 
But after the true text is approximately deter- 
mined, and the true interpretation secured with a 
reasonable degree of certainty, there may still be 
in the literature conveying the precious spiritual 
thought a residuum of erroneous conceptions re- 
lating to minor and irrelative points, which would 
not affect at all the absolute truth of the teachinof 
upon the main points. The presence of such 
errors is accounted for on the principle of accom- 
modation, and in reality is far from being a literary 
imperfection. The true theory of accommodation 
admits of the incorporation of many apparently 
false conceptions into the literary forms by which 
divine fruth is expressed. This approval of false 
conceptions will, however, be a matter of appear- 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 163 

ance rather than of reality. Since man is finite 
and at the outset perfectly ignorant, his increase 
in knowledge is necessarily gradual, and so it is 
not possible to teach him everything at once. The 
Avise teacher, therefore, concentrates the attention 
of his pupils upon one thing at a time, and does 
not meanwhile disturb the preconceived notions 
entertained upon subsidiary and minor points ; but 
by thus leaving minor errors unchallenged the 
teacher is far from endorsing them. 

Indeed, in popular literature an inordinate 
amount of attention to secure minutely exact 
statements of the subsidiary facts casually alluded 
to in the main discourse, is itself one of the most 
serious of rhetorical errors, and inevitably leads 
to a misapprehension of the importance of the 
principal points to be impressed ; hence, for ex- 
ample, in Scripture and everywhere the abundant 
use of round numbers. When a writer refers to 
something as having occurred fifty years ago, it 
depends upon the character of the literature 
whether we are to understand him as stating an 
exact number of years or only as referring to a 
long but rather indefinite period. It is the prov- 
ince of the interpreter to determine from close 
examination of the literature in which they occur, 
how exact the individual statements are meant to 
be. Words should not be pressed in poetiy as in 
prose, and in a popular address we should not 



164 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

expect the same attempt at accuracy that would 
be necessary in a scientific treatise. An oil paint- 
ing should not be scrutinized too closely. It is 
made for general effect at an appropriate distance, 
and not for microscopical examination. 

101. Every person in ordinary conversation ap- 
parently gives countenance to innumerable errors. 
In most cases, however, it is readily seen that 
such errors belong to the costume of speech, and 
are not really adopted by us. When we speak 
of a " lunatic asylum " no one would now think of 
imputing to us the notion that mental derangement 
is produced by the influence of the moon, though 
that is the theory underlying the etymology of the 
word, and the word came into its present use 
because the erroneous theory was once generally 
believed. Within the present generation the word 
"medium" has come into general use, and is em- 
ployed without protest by those who do not wish 
in any manner to countenance the theory which 
has given rise to the Avord. The Spiritualists 
really hold that certain of their number become 
mediums of communication between the living and 
the dead. But the majority of people use the 
word without protestation and without the slight- 
est intention of encouraging the error. It would 
be a useless affectation, and a waste of both time 
and space, to accompany the word "medium," 
everytime we had occasion to use it, with the 



INHERENT L>IFF1CULT1ES OF THE SUBJECT. 165 

prefix "so-called." When an ordinary writer 
says "medium" every one knows that he means a 
so-called medium. 

102. It is thus, no doubt, that Paul speaks ^ 
of the damsel at Philippi as having " a spirit of 
divination," literally of Pi/thon. It w^ould cer- 
tainly be unwarranted to attribute to Paul the full 
literal, or we would rather say the full etymologi- 
cal, meaning of this phrase ; for then we should 
make him endorse the polytheism of the Greeks. 
His opinions are so pronounced and well known 
upon that subject, however, that there is no more 
danger of misunderstanding than when we use the 
word "lunatic" or "medium," or, without thinking 
of the medical theory involved, we speak of 
"catching cold." It is thus that Christ can say 
the mustard-seed is "less than all seeds" ^ without 
any danger of our mistaking it for an exact scien- 
tific statement. Likewise, when Moses speaks^ 
of the coney as chewing the cud, and not 
parting the hoof, no one is troubled at finding 
that, though the exact truth is stated as to the 
hoof, and the coney is therefore an unclean animal, 
he does not in fact chew the cud, but only seems 
to do so — the coney being actually a rodent, and, 
like all that class, moving his jaws as if chewing 

1 Acts xvi. 16 sq. 

2 Matt. xiii. 81, 32; cf. Mark iv. 31. 

3 Lev. xi. 5. 



166 THE DIVINK AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

the cud, but really for the purpose of wearing off 
his teeth and keeping them from becoming un- 
comfortably long. This movement of the jaws 
was popularly misunderstood, but was, neverthe- 
less, one of the best signs by which to distinguish 
the animal, — which was all that was necessary for 
the purposes of the Mosaic reference. 

It is not always easy to tell the precise limits of 
the sphere of this principle of accommodation in 
language ; but the difficulty is no greater than 
universally exists in determining the boundary line 
between the figurative and the literal use of lan- 
guage. In general, however, there is little occa- 
sion for misunderstanding. It is as when night 
shades into day, or winter into spring, or the 
climate of the temperate zone into that of the 
torrid ; there is a confusing border-line between 
the two, but it is narrow, and' does by no means 
obscure the broad contrasts between the great 
classes of facts which are brought into com- 
pari son. 

103. A manifestly extreme and erroneous at- 
tempt to apply the theory of accommodation is found 
in the efforts to explain the alleged demoniacal pos- 
sessions (of which so much is said in the New Testa- 
ment) as ordinary physical and mental affections, 
now treated in insane asylums. It is true that 
most of the phenomena of those who are said to 
have been possessed by demons can be matched in 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 167 

modern records of insanity. But the same effects 
may be produced by a variety of causes. Apoplexy 
may be induced by excessive joy or grief. If the 
digestive organs are obstructed, the symptoms 
may be simihxr, whatever may be the primary 
cause of the obstruction. The specific cause pro- 
ducing disturbances in physiological or mental 
phenomena is not the only thing which determines 
the character of the effects. The principal factor 
in the production of such effects is to be found in 
the nature of the element disturbed. The ob- 
struction causing a ripple in the stream may be a 
block of stone, or a mass of iron, or a water- 
soaked log of wood. So it is too much for us to 
aflSrm that physicians have even yet penetrated to 
the real cause of all mental diseases. The physi- 
cal disturbances connected Avith mental disease.are 
only phenomena, for which we must ascribe a 
cause, and that cause mav well enouo-h be, in 
some cases, demoniacal possession. 

Now, our belief in the reality of demoniacal 
possession in the time of Christ rests upon a 
variety of facts, involving the veracity of the entire 
New Testament, a. The writers distinguished 
demoniacs from those who were sick.^ b. The 
demons are represented as speaking with super- 
natural knowledge of their own.^ c. The demons 

1 Mark i. 32; Luke vi. 17, 18; Matt. iv. 24. 

2 Matt. viii. 29; Mark i. 24, 25; v. 7; Luke iv. 41, 



168 THE DTVIXE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

at Gadara asked permission to go into a herd of 
swine. ^ The permission was granted. They went, 
and the results are Avell known, d. Christ re- 
peatedly reasons*^ with his disciples on the suppo- 
sition that demons are in tliQ service of Satan, and 
adduces the power to cast them out (which he 
both exercises and bestows) as a sign that the 
kingdom of heaven had come. e. Most signiticant 
of all, Jesus in private conversation with the disci- 
ples repeatedly speaks as if the popular ideas on 
the subject were correct.^ 

The number and variety of these concessions to 
the prevailing view concerning demoniacal posses- 
sion render it exceedingly difficult, not to say 
impossible, to explain them all away upon the 
theory of accommodation. It is not once or twice, 
but w^ell-nigh a hundred times, that the matter is 
referred to. The popular error, if real, seems too 
serious to have been thus encouraged hy him 
whose mission it was to bear witness to the truth ; 
especialljs as the connection shows, to that truth 
which was related to the way of salvation and 
life. Any one can see that the encouragement of 
superstition is a very different matter from merely 
allowing erroneous scientific conceptions to remain 
undisturbed, and it sustains a much more vital 

1 Matt. viii. 31; Mark v. 12; Luke viii. 32. 

2 Matt. xii. 24-32; Mark iii. 22-30; Luke x. 17-20; xi. 15-23. 

3 Matt. X. 8; xii. 43 sq. ; Mark ix. 28, 20: Liiko x. 18 sq. 



INHERENT DIFFICULTIES OF THE SUBJECT. 169 

relation to the great spiritual truths upon which 
our salvation depen.ds. Thus, as we approach the 
central subjects of revelation, the divine veracity 
becomes more and more involved in the forms of 
statement. 

104. It would be difficult to maintain respect 
for the New Testament writers if they were so un- 
critical that no dependence can be placed upon 
their explicit statements of facts. Before endeav- 
oring, however, to state exactly the latitude of his- 
torical inaccuracy which might be compatible with 
the divine authority of their teachings upon moral 
and religious subjects, it is proper to ask how 
much of the alleged historical inaccuracy of the 
sacred writers is real, and how much is a figment 
of the critical imagination. There is scarcely any 
limit to the boldness of infidels and rash critics in 
asserting the existence of irreconcilable discrepan- 
cies in the Bible, and of attributing to it positive 
error of various kinds. Now, as in the days of the 
beloved disciple, we are in need of his wholesome 
advice : " Beloved, believe not every spirit, but 
prove the spirits, whether they are of God ; be- 
cause many false prophets are gone out into the 
world.^'i 

The belief in the existence of an unlimited 
amount of discrepancy and error in the Bible is 
more likely to prevail because of the positiveness 

i 1 John iv. 1. 



172 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Christ as "standing over her" when he rebuked 
the fever (without any intimation that he touched 
her) ; Matthew mentions that he " touched her 
hand," and the fever left her ; while ]\Iark adds 
that he '' took her by the hand, and raised her up," 
and the fever left her. In this simple case it is 
eas}^ enough to see how the testimon}^ of the one 
supplements that of the other, and how each item 
of information can be worked into a consistent 
whole, anJ made to contriljute to the vividness of 
the picture. Putting all the accounts together, it 
would read, "And he stood over her, and rebuked 
the fever, and touched her hand, and lifted her 
up, and immediately the fever left her, and she 
ministered unto them." 

107. Nor is it only in describing scenes and 
actions that ditierent a\ ords may be employed by 
different writers to convey a connnon fact. In re- 
porting the remarks of another so as to convey 
their full meanino' to a reader or to a different 
audience from that to which they were addressed, 
c()nsideraT)le liberty is allowable. For example, 
in the account of the stilling of the tempest, in 
the midst of which Christ had fallen asleep in the 
bottom of the ship,^ ]Mattliew represents the dis- 
ciples as awakening him with the cry, " Save, Lord, 
we perish"; in ]\Iark it reads, " Master, carest 
thou not that we perisli?" while in Luke it is, 

1 Matt. viii. 25; Mark iv. 38; Luke viii. 24. 



ALLEGED VERBAL DISCREPANCIES. 173 

'^Master, master, we perish." Now, in maintain- 
ing that we have here a correct account of what 
occurred, it is not necessary for us to suppose that 
these three exact forms of words were used upon 
that occasion. Indeed, it is probable that the 
words were not spoken in Greek, but in Aramaic, 
and so as we have them are only translations from 
the original. But even if they had been spoken in 
Greek, we only have to suppose (what is evident 
enough from their brevity) that each one is but a 
partial quotation of what numerous voices uttered, 
and of words to which the tones of voice and the 
attitudes of the speakers imparted a meaning n^hicli 
cannot be all transferred to the printed page by 
literal quotation. Again, in the Saviour's reply to 
them, the phrase in Matthew is, ^' Why are ye fear- 
ful, yeof little faith?'' in Mark, "Why are ye 
fearful? have ye not yet faith V or according to the 
reading of some manuscripts, " How is it that ye 
have no faithV Here, also, it is evident it cannot 
be affirmed that any one form of printed words 
exhausts the meaning of Christ's utterance. O ye 
of little faith may be said with a tone and inflec- 
tion to convey all the meaning expressed in the 
phrase, Have ye not yet faith? Or, again, we can 
say — and that with a pretty high degree of cer- 
tainty — that the reported hiconic phrases of our 
Lord were probably not by any means all that he 
said upon that occasion. It is presumable that 



172 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Christ as "standing over her" when he rebuked 
the fever (without any intimation that he touched 
her) ; MattheAV mentions that he '' touched her 
hand," and the fever left her; while Mark adds 
that he '' took her by the hand, and raised her up," 
and the fever left her. In this simple case it is 
eas}^ enough to see how the testimony of the one 
supplements that of the other, and how each item 
of information can be worked into a consistent 
whole, and made to contribute to the vividness of 
the picture. Putting all the accounts together, it 
Avould read, "And he stood over her, and rebuked 
the fever, and touched her hand, and lifted her 
up, and immediately^ the fever left her, and she 
ministered unto them." 

107. Nor is it only in describing scenes and 
.actions that different words may be employed by 
different writers to convey a common fact. In re- 
l)orting the remarks of another so as to convey 
their full meaning to a reader or to a different 
audience from that to which they were addressed, 
c()nsideral)le liberty is allowable. For example, 
in the account of the stilling of the tempest, in 
the midst of which Christ had fallen asleep in the 
bottom of the ship,^ INIatthew represents the dis- 
ciples as awakening him with the cry, " Save, Lord, 
we perish"; in Mark it reads, "Master, carest 
thou not that we perish?" while in Luke it is, 

1 Matt. viii. 25; Mark iv. 38; Luke viii. 2-4. 



ALLEGED VEKBAL DISCREPANCIES. 173 

"Master, master, we perish." Now, in maintain- 
ing that we have here a correct account of what 
occurred, it is not necessary for us to suppose that 
these three exact forms of words were used upon 
that occasion. Indeed, it is probable that the 
words were not spoken in Greek, but in Aramaic, 
and so as we have them are only translations from 
the original. But even if they had been spoken in 
Greek, we only have to suppose (what is evident 
enough from their brevity) that each one is but a 
partial quotation of what numerous voices uttered, 
and of words to which the tones of voice and the 
attitudes of the speakers imparted a meaning which 
cannot be all transferred to the printed page by 
literal quotation. Again, in the Saviour's reply to 
them, the phrase in Matthew is, " Why are ye fear- 
ful, O yeof little faithr' in Mark, "Why are ye 
fearful? have ye not yet faith f or according to the 
reading of some manuscripts, "How is it that ye 
have no faith?'^ Here, also, it is evident it cannot 
be affirmed that any one form of printed words 
exhausts the meaning of Christ's utterance. ye 
of little faith may be said with a tone and inflec- 
tion to convey all the meaning expressed in the 
phrase, Have ye not yet faith? Or, again, we can 
say — and that with a pretty high degree of cer- 
tainty — that the reported laconic phrases of our 
Lord were probaljly not by any means all that he 
said upon that occasion. It is presumable that 



174 THE JDIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Jesus uttered many words, as John assures us that 
he perfornied many miracles, ^^ which are not 
written in this book," and that only such things 
are recorded as are necessary to lead us to a full 
faith that Jesus is the Christ, and that we may 
have life in his name.^ In affirming or denying the 
perfection of the sacred record we are bound to re- 
member the relative character of all perfection. 
In affirming perfection of an}^ thing the object for 
which the thing exists must be kept in view. A 
perfect carriage wheel, for example, is far from 
being perfect when considered apart from its rela- 
tion to the rest of the vehicle. The human eye is 
not perfect in itself, but only in its adaptations to 
the diversified composition of man — not only as he 
exists individually, but as he is propagated under a 
complicated physical law of inheritance. Nor in 
speaking of the perfection of God's work in the 
natural creation do we imply that equal perfection 
could not have been secured in another plan. So, 
also, the particular Avords chosen to express the 
designed ideas in revelation might, for aught we 
know, have been replaced by others equally good, 
but not by smy which are better adapted to their 
purpose. 

108. We are compelled to give more attention 
to the subject of alleged verbal discrepancies in 
Scripture than would otherwise be necessary, be- 

1 John XX. 30, 31. 



ALLEGED VERBAL DISCREPANCIES. 175 

cause of the mistaken prominence given to this 
class of objections by some recent writers/ who 
treat the question with little regard to the true 
logical principles involved. A few instances may, 
therefore, be treated liere in greater detail than 
was proper when illustrating the processes of in- 
terpretation. It is, however, foreign to the design 
of the present discussion to consider at length 
every alleged discrepancy of the Bible. For such 
treatment the reader is referred to standard works 
on the subject.'^ 

A prominent example introduced by Dr. Ladd 
among the irreconcilable discrepancies of the 
Gospels relates to the conversation of Christ with 
the rich young man.^ In this narrative, according 
to the text which is now received, Matthew 
makes Christ say in reply to the young man, 
" AVhy asketh thou me concerning that which 
is good? One there is who is good''; while in 
Mark and Luke Christ's reply reads, ^^ Why callest 
thou me good? None is good, save one, even 
God." Professor Ladd asserts that "both forms 
of the reply cannot be correct ; and that in which 
Mark and Luke agree is doubtless the original 
one."^ On the contrary, we may safely affirm that 

1 See especially The Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, by George 
T. Ladd, D.D. 

^ See especially Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. 
3 Matt. xix. 17; Maik x. 18; Luke xviii. 19. 
^ Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, Yol. I. p. 401. 



176 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

there is scarcely nny difficulty at all in believing 
that both forms are correct. In order to warrant 
Professor Ladd's assertion, he must assume, with- 
out evidence and against all probability, that the 
evangelists pretended to give a complete account of 
all the conversation that took place between Christ 
and the rich young man; whereas, any one at all 
familiar with the dialectical processes naturally 
pursued in such a private conversation as this be- 
tween Christ and the rich young man, can easily 
see that in an interview of half an hour, or ten 
minutes even, there was superabundant opportunity 
for all the expressions recorded in Matthew and 
Mark, and many more, to have been made. 

109. Dr. Ladd likewise finds ^ a discrepancy 
between Matt. xix. 7 and Mark x. 3, because in 
one part of the discussion between Christ and the 
Piiarisees respecting divorce, Christ himself appeals 
to Moses, and asks the Pharisees, " AVhat did 
Moses command you?" and in another part of the 
conversation the Pharisees say unto him, "Why, 
then, did Moses command to give a bill of divorce- 
ment?" It is possible to find a discrepancy here 
only on the assumption that all the conversation 
upon that occasion consists of the one hundred and 
one words comprised in Matthew's report, with the 
addition of the few variations of Mark. This 
would reduce the interview to a period of about 

^ Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, Vol. I. p. 401. 



ALLEGED VERBAL D1SCP.EPANCIES . 177 

two minutes; whereas, if they were ten minutes 
together — or five minutes even — there was ample 
room for all these variations which are thought to 
irive so much trouble. We submit that it is alto- 
gether probable that the interview continued for a 
considerable time, and that the dialogue between 
Christ and the Pharisees, like a meandering stream, 
was continually shifting positions of attack and 
defence. 

110. The same writer is also doubtful whether 
the four forms of the inscription over the cross can 
be verballv reconciled.^ The tacts concerninof this 
are simply these : According to John,^ the inscrip- 
tion on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, 
and Greek, — that is, there were three inscriptions, 
and that is just what seems to be given l)y the 
different evangelists. John records the inscrip- 
tion as ^^ eJesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews " 
(perhaps the Hebrew form) ; Matthew gives it as 
*' This is Jesus, the king of the Jews '' (perhaps 
the Greek form) ; 3 Mark gives it as simply "The 
king of the Jews " (perhaps, or we may say prob- 
ably, the translation of the Latin inscription) ; ^ 
Ijuke agrees word for word with Mark, except 
that he adds the damonstrative pronoun '^this" 
i^olioz)^ which makes it read, "This is the king of 
the Jews, "^ — a freedom Avhich is perfectly allow- 

1 Doctrine of Sacred Scripture, Vol. I. p. 400. 

2 John xix. 20. ^ Matt, xxvii. 37. 
* Mark xv. 26. ^ Luke xxiii. 38. 



178 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 



able in translating the two words, Rex Judaeorumy 
which would suffice in the terse Latin tongue.^ 

111. Perhaps the most difficult of all the ap- 
parent discrepancies in quoting the Saviour's 
language, occurs in the instructions given to the 
twelve when first sent out on their apostolic mis- 
sion. We give the accounts in parallel columns : 



Matt. X. 

9 Get you no gold, 
nor silver, nor brass 

10 in your purses; no 
Avallet for your jour- 
ney, neither two 
coats, nor shoes, nor 
statf : for the laborer 
is worthy of his 
food. 



Mark VI. 

8 And he charged 
them that they 
should take nothing 
for their journey, 
save a statf only: no 
bread, no wallet, no 
moneyin their purse; 

9 but to go shod with 
sandals: and, said he, 
put not on two coats. 



Luke IX. 

3 And he said unto 
them, Take nothing 
for your journey, 
neither statf, nor 
wallet, nor bread, 
nor money; neither 
have two coats. 



Here we have a report of certain w^ords spoken 
by Jesus to his disciples, upon one of the most 
important and solemn occasions of their lives. All 
told, Matthew gives to his entire summary of the 
discourse only twelve verses, or one hundred and 
ninety-three words, while Luke and Mark content 
themselves with scarcely more than one-third of 
that amount. But are we warranted in supposing, 
much less in confidently affirming (as we must do 
to find a discrepancy), that the admonitions of 
Christ on that occasion were no more extended and 
particular and personal than they appear to be from 

» See Geikie's Life of Christ, Vol. II. p. 043. 



ALLEGED VERBAL DISCREPANCIES. 179 

these reports ? As far as possible from it. On 
the contrary, we have every reason to believe that 
at such a crisis of their history there would have 
been a prolonged conversation between Christ and 
his disciples. How dangerous it is to draw infer- 
ences from negativ^e testimony in such a case, is 
illustrated in the reports given by the evangelists 
of the last interview between Christ and his dis- 
ciples before his arrest. Had the accounts of 
Matthew, Mark, and Luke alone been left us, Ave 
should have known even less of what occurred on 
that memorable occasion than we now do of the 
conversation which took place when the apostles 
first received their commission, and were sent out 
on their trial journey. But John has also left an 
account of the last interview l)efore the arrest, and 
nearly five chapters^ are occupied with reporting 
the words of Jesus upon that occasion. 

112. From this we see how little warrant any 
one can have for narrowino; down the discourse of 
Christ upon the important occasion of inducting 
the apostles into their office to the one hundred 
and ninety-three words recorded by Matthew. 
Now it cannot be denied that the impression made 
upon the mind by these three accounts is essen- 
tially the same ; and a little attention will show 
that the apparent discrepancies can easily enough 
be accounted for, even on the theory of verbal 

1 John xiii.-xvii. 



180 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

inspiration. To bring about this harmony we 
need only suppose that Christ's whole discourse 
occupied a half hour, and consisted of live hun- 
dred words. The common impression made hy 
each one of the accounts is, that the disciples were 
to be lightly attired, free from care, and wholh" 
devoted to their work. Any one familiar with 
the bold and powerful antitheses of the Sermon on 
the Mount will not ])e troubled with findino- in one 
part of the Saviour's discourse, on such an occa- 
sion, the command to "take no staff," and in 
another part, to '^take onli/ a staff." Every word 
can come in easily and harmoniously enough when, 
by a proper use of the historic imagination, the 
Avhole scene is brought to view. Suppose, as the 
Saviour Avas proceeding, his eye fell on a poor 
disciple whose entire outfit consisted of a staff, a 
wallet, sandals, and a single tunic ; that would 
naturally give a turn to the portion of the dis- 
course related by Mark ; and with his e} e fixed 
on him, Christ would naturally say: ''Take 
J^uioioau'^ nothing for your journey, save a staff 
only ; no bread, no wallet, no money in your 
purse ; but go shod Avith sandals, and do not put 
on two coats." His eye falling on another who 
has not even a stafi*, he says, as reported by 
Matthew and Luke : '' Go forth just as j'ou are ; 
get [xTTJir/^aiV^f] you uo gold, uor silver, nor brass 
in your purses ; no wallet for your journey, neither 



ALLEGED VERBAL DISCKEPANCIES. 181 

two coats, nor shoes, nor staff." It is utterly 
immaterial whether you take a staff or not, but go 
forth devoted entirely to your spiritual mission. 
This is the true inference respecting the passage, 
rather than the conclusion of Dr. Ladd that ^^ the 
detail as to two tunics was impressed indelibly, 
while the command as to the staff was indeiinite in 
their minds." ^ 

113. It is equally easy to dispose of what is said 
about the impossibility of harmonizing the two 
reports of the Sermon on the Mount. But here, 
again, w^e find Dr. Ladd declaring that they "^are so 
essentially two different, and in some respects 
discrepant, accounts that no harmony is possible."'^ 
These reports are found in Matt, v., vi., and vii., 
and Luke vi. 17-49. That they are reports of 
two different discourses is possible; in which case 
there will be no occasion to consider the alleo;ed 
discrepancies. But that they are reports of one 
discourse is probable from the extended and strik- 
ins: resemblances of the two. "The be^rinnino- and 
ending of both are the same ; there is a general 
similarity in the order and often identity in the 
expressions."^ But, in considering the possibility 
of harmonizing the two accounts, we should con- 
sider how brief they both are, even though long in 

1 Vol. L pp. 400, 40L 

2 Ibid., p. 402. 

^ Andrews' Life of Our Lord, p, 252. 



182 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

comparison with the ordinary reports of the 
Saviour's addresses. Matthew's report of the 
sermon is comprised in one hundred and seven 
verses, while Luke's contains onl}^ thirty. Proba- 
bly, however, even Matthew's account is not one- 
fourth part of the whole sermon of our Lord, 
adapted as it Avas in extemporaneous discourse to 
the varied wants of the vast multitude. 

114. The apparent difference in time may 
arise from the fact that Matthew does not connect 
his facts in chronological order — a thing which, 
as a historian, he was under no obligation to do, 
unless that was his professed object. As to the 
apparent discrepancy in the ^^lace in which the 
sermon is said to have been preached, it is suffi- 
cient to remark that where the description of the 
movements of a great multitude at such an excit- 
ing time is compressed by one evangelist into a 
single verse, and is expanded by another into only 
four verses, there is little reason to expect minute- 
ness of topographical description. A mountain 
occupies a large territory ; and when INIatthew 
simply sa3^s that "Jesus went up into a mountain, 
and when he was set his disciples came unto him ; 
and he opened his mouth and taught them," he 
has in no way or manner contradicted the more 
minute account of Luke, who says he came down 
into a level place (tottoi; Tiednov^, Level places 
may be numerous on the sides of a mountain. 



ALLEGED VERBAL DISCREPANCIES. 183 

115. It is needless to deny that many attempts 
to harmonize the Gospel narratives have been un- 
necessarily extravagant and fanciful. Nevertheless, 
the fact remains that, after careful study of the 
subject, the great mass of sober-minded scholars 
have been satisfied that there is no occasion to 
ascribe inaccuracy even in details to anyone of the 
evangelists. The burden of proof rests upon those 
who allege the inaccuracies ; and so many of their 
cases have been explained in the processes of 
modern investigation that this burden of proof is 
growing continually heavier. The renewed charges 
of inaccuracy brought from time to time against 
the Bible are not made necessary by the discovery 
of new facts. They are rather the result either of 
the imperfect acquaintance of new authors with 
the discussions that have gone before, or of a fail- 
ure properly to appreciate the supernatural char- 
acter of Christianity, which makes many things 
probable that Avould not otherwise be so. 



184 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 



XL 

ALLEGED ERRORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IN 
QUOTING THE OLD. 

116. In many cases of quotation from the Old 
Testament, and of references to its facts, the 
Avriters of the New Testament are said to take a 
liberty with the Old Avhich is inconsistent with the 
theory that the Old Testament is inspired in all 
its parts. In other cases it is alleged that the 
writers of the New Testament misapprehend and 
misapply the prophecies of the Old Testament, or 
even distort its facts. In considering some of 
these alleged discrepancies it seems best, as in the 
previous section, to begin with such as have been 
made prominent by recent writers. Dr. Ladd again 
makes this class of objections the basis of his 
criticisms upon the ordinary view of inspiration. 

The first case to Avhich we allude is too trivial 
to have deserved attention but for the prominence 
given it by Dr. Ladd; yet its triviality will not 
l)revent its serving to illustrate a principle. Matt, 
xxiv. 37 sq. reports Christ as sa\n'ng that in the 
''days Avhich were before the flood they were 



ALLEGED ERRORS IN QUOTATION. 185 

eating and drinkiug, marrying and giving in mar- 
riage, until the day that Noah entered into the 
ark." Professor Ladd sees here indications that 
Christ was "following a tradition of the flood 
Avhich differed in some particulars from that of the 
Hebrew Scriptures " ; and he calls upon the reader 
to "notice the features added to the narrative of 
Genesis; especially the word rilvoi^Teg [drinking] 
in apparent contradiction of the narrative of Gen. 
ix. 20."^ How little the occasion to find a dis- 
crepancy here will appear w^hen the passage re- 
ferred to in Genesis is quoted : '^ And Noah began 
to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard, 
and drank of the wine, and was drunken."^ How 
any one should infer from this passage in Genesis 
that there was no drinkino- before the flood it is 
difficult to imagine ; for the phrase " ^ began to be 
an husbandman' cannot mean that this was the 
first time he had practised husbandry, but the 
beo-inninof of it after the flood." ^ 

117. Dr. Ladd also thinks that in Christ's ref- 
erence* to the famine in the time of Elijah,^ "he 
seems to incorporate that divergent eTewish tradi- 
tion which extended the duration of the drouo-ht 

o 

to three jears and a half, and which James also ac- 

1 Ladd, as above. Foot note on page 69. 

2 Gen. ix. 20, 21. 

2 Tayler Lewis on Genesis in Lange's Commentaryo 
4 Luke iv. 25-27. 
^ 1 Kings xvii. 9 ff. 



186 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

cepts, and employs the popular hyperbole which 
spoke of the drought as extending over the whole 
earth." ^ Now the whole of this reference to 
"divergent Jewish tradition" and "popular hj^per- 
l)ole " in this case is purely imaginary and gratui- 
tous. One has but to consult the Greek lexicon, 
or, for that matter, the Revised Version of 1881, 
or even that of 1611, to see that Christ did not 
say over the whole earthy but over the Avhole land^ 
this being a perfectly allowable translation for the 
Greek Avord 7^ (gee); and in James the pres- 
ence of hyperbole is even less manifest, since the 
w^ord " whole " is absent. As to extending the 
drought to three years and a half, there is nothing 
to prevent such an extension, since in Kings it is 
simply said : " There shall not be dew nor rain 
these years," ^ and at the command of the Lord 
Elijah went up to the brook Cherith, and remained 
until the brook dried up, w^iich is said to have been 
" after a while " ; whereupon the Lord commanded 
the prophet to go to Zarephath ; " and it came to 
pass, after many days, that the word of the Lord 
came to Elijah in the third year, saying, Go, shew 
thyself unto Ahab ; and I will send rain upon the 
earth." ^ It is not said that this is the third year 
of the famine, but the more natural inference is 
that it is the third year of his stay at Zarephath, 
which with the " after a while " would make the whole 
* Vol. I. p. 09. 2 I Kings xvii. 1. ^ 1 Kings xviii. 1. 



ALLEGED ERRORS IN QUOTATION. 187 

time neither very much more nor very much less 
than three years and six months. Instead of 
drawing from this instance, as Dr. Ladd does, the 
inference that Christ "thus manifests his entirely 
uncritical attitude towards the details of the nar- 
rative," ^ the extreme advocates of verbal inspira- 
tion might infer that Christ's attitude was intended 
to be very critical, and that he intended to give 
the weight of his authority to a minutely accurate 
interpretation of the Old Testament account. 

118. Another case introduced by Dr. Ladd 
will lead the way to some additional remarks con- 
cerning the correct view of the relation of words 
to things, and enable us to clear away some preva- 
lent misconceptions as to the functions of language. 
Isa. xxix. 13 contains a somewhat obscure sen- 
tence, translated in our version, ^^ And their fear 
toward me is taught by the precept of men" 
(literally, from the Hebrew, "And their fear 
toward me has become a precept of men, taught"). 
Christ, in quoting this, follows very closely the 
translation of the Septuagint : " But in vain do 
they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the 
precepts of men."^ Upon this. Professor Ladd has 
to remark that Christ follows the Septuagint " in 
introducing the important word ^i<j.ti]v [in vain], 
which has no correlative in the Hebrew text. This 
is done apparently to justify his application of the 

1 Vol. I. p. 69. 2 jvxatt. XV. 9. 



188 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

prophecy as ^^^^ A^wr [concerning you]."^ Now, 
it is indeed true, as Professor Ladd says, that 
there is no single word here in the Hebrew cor- 
responding to " in vain " ; but in transferring 
thought from one language to another the trans- 
lator could make little progress if he were com- 
pelled to use only such words as were exactly 
correlative. The thought of a Avriter cannot be 
obtained by pulverizing his sentences and subject- 
ing the product to chemical analysis. The thought 
of a sentence is largely conveyed by the collocation 
of the words and by paying due regard to usages 
of speech for which we can give no reason. 
A particular thought is often held in a sentence 
in solution, as sugar is in water, and crystallizes 
into a word only when subjected to the process 
of translation, — a process which is, in many re- 
spects, like that of evaporation from one liquid 
and resolution in another. In the present case, 
the "in vain" of the Septuagint is mplicitly 
in the Hebrew sentence, and it falls within the 
proper province of a translation to bring it out 
explicitly in Greek. To serve God merely in 
obedience to human authority is to entirely miss 
the end of worship, and is utterly in vain. We 
surely should be willing to grant the writers of 
the New Testament the liberties of an ordinaiy 
translator. In transferring the thought of the 

1 Vol. I. p. 71. 



ALLEGED ERRORS IN QUOTATION. 189 

Hebrew into Greek forms even a paraphrase may 
be necessary. 

119. The Book of Hebrews has been specially 
discredited by some on account of the character of 
its Old Testament quotations, Professor Toy even 
affirming that " it shows an entire disregard of the 
connection of thought of the Old Testament," and 
that it cites " from it a passage which is not found 
in the Hebrew," ''and in one passage reverses the 
sense of the original." ^ 

The passage which it is alleged is not found in 
the Hebrew is Heb. i. 6, '' And let all the angels 
of God worship him." An examination of the 
facts, however, will show that Professor Toy's 
confident assertion is far from being correct. There 
are two places in the Old Testament wdiere the 
Septuagint has a clause equivalent to that in 
Hebrews; viz. Deut. xxxii. 43 and Ps. xcvii. 7, 
Deuteronomy reading, '' Let all the angels of God 
worship him," and Psalms, "Worship him, all ye 
his angels." In Deuteronomy there is nothing in 
the Hebrew which can be construed as an equivalent 
of the clause ; but in Psalms there is, the passage 
reading literally, '' Worship him, all ye gods." Be- 
fore Professor Toy is warranted in his sweeping 
assertion, therefore, he is bound to consider the 
question, whether the Hebrew word translated 
"gods" (^"^r''^.^.) is not sufficiently elastic to per- 

1 Quotations in the New Testament, p. xxxvii. 



190 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLcE. 

mit it to be translated ^^ angels " in some connec- 
tions. Following the assertion of Gesenius, Pro-, 
fessor Toy affirms that ^'^ri^.^. never means " angels." 
But upon this we join issue with him, and affirm 
that no one knows enough about Hebrew usage to 
be so confident as he is in his affirmation. In the 
first place, it should count for something that the 
scholars who translated the Septuagint understood 
^^^^^. to mean " angels " both here and in the 
eighth Psalm, where the clause "Thou hast made 
him a little lower than the ansrels " mio'ht read in 
Hebrew "a little lower than God." In the second 
place, it should count for something, also, that in 
both these cases the author of the Book of Hebrews 
endorses the translation of the Septuagint. In the 
third place, the elasticity of the word ^^r*-.^. appears 
in Ps. Ixxxii. 6, where the judges of Israel are ad- 
dressed as "gods" (^^<^""^) ; and in John x. 35 
Clirist himself endorses that use of the word. 
From all this it appears that " divine-like honor 
and dignity, therefore, are all that, in such cases, 
can be fairly understood by the term. And as the 
angels stand highest in this respect among created 
intelligences known to men, they are not un- 
naturally regarded as the beings that most fully 
answer to the description. Substantially, there- 
fore, the Greek version here gives the sense of the 
original ; and some of the best commentators still 



ALLEGED ERRORS IN QUOTATION. 191 

concur in it as the most appropriate rendering that 
can be given." ^ 

120. Professor Toy's assertion that in Heb. x. 
5-10 the quotation from the Old Testament " re- 
verses the sense of the original," deserves atten- 
tion both from the confidence with which it is put 
forth and from the intrinsic difficulty of the pas- 
sage. But here, also, the question is not regard- 
ing a fact which is fully ascertained, but whether 
Professor Toy properly understands the fact. 
Whether the sense of the original is reversed by 
the author of Hebrews or not, depends upon the 
interpretation of the passage. The passage reads : 
^^^ " Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he 
saith. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but 
a body didst thou prepare for me ; ^^^ in whole 
burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hadst 
no pleasure: ^'^ then said I, Lo, I am come (in 
the roll of the book it is written of me) to do thy 
will, O God. ^^^ Saying above, sacrifices and 
offerings and whole burnt ofi'erings and scicrifices 
for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure 
therein (the which are offered according to the law) , 
^^^ then hath he said, Lo, I am come to do thy 
will. He taketh away the first, that he may estab- 
lish the second. ^^^^ By which w^ill we have been 
sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus 
Christ once for all." The clause in the fifth verse, 

1 Fairbairn's Hermeneiitical Manual , p. 444. 



192 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

"a body didst thou prepare for me," appears to 
have no corresponding clause m Ps. xl. 6-8, from 
Avhich the quotation is made. But to say that it 
^^ reverses the sense of the original" is incorrect. 
The i)hrase in Ps. xl. 6 corresponding to "a bod)^ 
thou hast prepared for me," is " My ears hast thou 
opened," which is probably a figurative way of 
saying, " Thou hast made me obedient," which, 
under another figure, may also be taken as the 
sense of the clause, " a body thou hast prepared 
for me." "The implication of the phrase [a body 
thou hast prepared for me] cjw//« Kaii]Qi:au) ^/o/, in the 
connection where it stands, is, that this body was 
to be a victim instead of the legal sacrifices ; of 
course a devotedness of the highest nature is im- 
plied. Ad sensu7n, then, in a general point of view, 
the text may be regarded as cited ; and this, often- 
times, is all at which the New Testament writers 
aim."^ 

121. The scope of the present brief treatise will 
not permit us to examine in detail all of the in- 
stances in which the writers of the New Testament 
are alleged to have misunderstood or to have mis- 
quoted the Old Testament. Our object here is to 
illustrate the principles upon which those apparent 
misapplications are to be explained. A number 
of instances were considered by way of illustration 
in the chapter treating of the Interpretation of 

* Stuart's Coiiinientary on Hebrews, p. 552. 



ALLEGED ERRORS IN QUOTATION. 193 

Scripture. For examination of all the cases in 
detail, the reader is referred to special treatises 
upon the subject.^ It should be remembered, 
however, that in the majority of cases where the 
Old Testament is quoted by the writers of the 
New, there is no seeming difficulty to one who 
admits the supernatural character of Christianity, 
and who will grant to Christ and the apostles in 
interpreting the Old Testament a small portion of 
the authority which is claimed by modern com- 
mentators. Professor Fairbairn at the close of his 
patient examination of such cases gives the follow- 
ing general result : ^ Of the one hundred and 
thirty-six quotations of the Old Testament in the 
New considered (which, not reckoning the repeated 
citations, include all that are really formal cita- 
tions), seventy-two correspond exactly with the 
Hebrew, thirty differ from it in points so slight as 
to indicate no diversity of sense, seventeen follow 
the Septuagint where it seems to diverge to some 
extent from the Hebrew ; but '^ the variations are 
commonly of a formal kind ; and even when they 
exhibit a sul)stantial difierence, it is only by a sort 
of paraphrastic explanation being given of the 
original, or by a distinct impression being imparted 

1 Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible; Fairbairn's 
Hermeneutical Manual, pp. 390-503; Davidson on Sacred Her- 
meneutics, pp. 334-515; Home's Introduction, Vol. 11. pp. 
113-20T; Tholuck in BlbUotheca Sacra, Vol. xi. pp. 568-616. 

^ Hermeneutical Manual, p. 452. 



194 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

to a particular aspect of the truth, such as speci- 
fying a result or a cause, which the original did 
nothing more than indicate. In none of the cases 
are we presented with a different sense, but simply 
with a modified representation of the same sense. 
And in the remaining seventeen, in which neither 
is the Hebrew nor the Septuagint strictly folloAved, 
there is a common principle pervading them ;^ that, 
namely, of rendering something peculiar or obscure 
in the original more clearly intelligible to those 
who were immediately in the eye of the New 
Testament waiter, or to readers generally in gospel 
times. In the whole of this class of cases, as w^ell 
as of the immediately preceding one, the general 
meaning of the ancient Scripture is still preserved, 
and nothing in doctrine or precept is built upon 
the superficial diff'erences existing between the 
citation and the original." 

1 The Hebrew was not a spoken language in the time of 
Christ, but was represented by tlie dialect formerly known as 
Clialdee, now known as Aramaic. There are many indications, 
besides this last class of quotations referred to, which indicate 
that in the time of Christ there was a popular translation in the 
Aramaic language of the Hebrew Bible. See Prof. Bolil's 
" Forschum^en nach einer Yolksbibel zur Zeit Jesu." 



HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 195 



XTI. 

HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 

122. At this point it is pro]oer to make a few 
remarks upon the alleged contradictions between 
the Bible and science, most prominent of which 
are those between Genesis and o'eolo2:y ^"ind be- 
tween the Bible and the supposed teachings of 
science concerning the antiquity of man. Upon 
each of these topics it is important to notice that 
before a conflict can be established we must be 
sure that we have properly interpreted the facts 
both of science and the Bil)le. Few, however, 
would now be disposed to deny that geology 
teaches that the world was created countless ao;es 
ago, and that the separate epochs of creation were 
not days of twenty-four hours each. This would 
therefore bring the 'scientific man in conflict with 
Moses if w^e are shut up to a mechanical and 
inelastic interpretation of the inspired words in 
the first chapter of Genesis. But Ave are not thus 
shut up. There are two very plausible lines of 
interpretation (each depending on the Avell-known 
elasticity of the Avord "day") AAdiich keep clear of 



196 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

conflict with modern scientific investigations. The 
word day, as every one knows, has a great variety 
of significations. For example, if in the first 
chapter of Genesis "day" means twenty-four 
hours, and seven such daj^s are indicated, what 
should we say of Gen. ii. 4, which speaks of the 
whole work liaving l)een done in one day ("These 
are the generations of the heavens and of the 
earth when they were created, in the day that the 
Lord God made the earth and the heavens") ? and 
what shall we say of Deut. ix. 1, where iMoses 
tells the people that they shall pass over Jordan 
this day, while knowing well that they should not 
do so until after his death? The elasticity of the 
word is also seen at once in such a phrase as 
"This will not happen in your day," where a very 
indefinite period is meant. We might even say, 
"Rome, in the day of her power, was mistress of 
the world," Avhen the word w^ould cover a con- 
siderable period. Proceeding from this range in 
the use of the word day, some fail to see any 
reference here to periods of time at all, and would 
say, "The object of Moses in the first chapter of 
Genesis is so evidently to counteract the pol^the- 
ism of his day, and to assert the monotheism 
which is so characteristic a doctrine of Jewish 
belief, that it could not have been in his mind to 
make prominent the petty details of scientific dis- 
covery relating to the time and mode of creation. 



HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 197 

But he contents himself with aflSrming in sul)limest 
forms of speech that God is the Creator of all 
thinofs. This he does both in sfeneral and in detail, 
— grouping together under the work of the several 
days the whole list of ol)jects to which idolatrous 
worship was paid, and affirming that the}^ were all 
nothing but created objects, and that man was in 
dignity higher than all other created things, and 
hence it was very foolish to worship them."^ 

123. Another view, however, has been enter- 
tained in recent times by many eminent scientific 
men. This view regards the six days of creation 
mentioned by Moses as six great periods or cos- 
mogonic days, which are supposed to have marked 
the progress of the earth's creation up to the 
advent of man;^ and it certainly is a most re- 
markable occurrence that centuries before the 
Christian era an orderly account of creation should 
have been written into which it is so easy to 
adjust all the facts of modern science. Even the 
theories of evolution, so far as they are capable of 
proof, find little to oppose them in this remarkable 
composition. As Professor Guyot has pointed 
out, the language of Genesis Avould necessitate 
only three distinct periods of creation, leaving the 

1 See these views more fully developed in the author's 
Studies in Science and Religion, Chap. vii. 

2 See especially Creation, or the Biblical Cosmogony in the 
Light of Modern Science, by Arnold Guyot, one of the latest 
and most consistent interpreters of this theory. 



198 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

rest to proceed by natunil processes. It is a fact 
not -sufficiently observed, that there are two words 
in Genesis to represent the act of creation ; 
namely, bard and asdh (&^'i:n and riirj?), of which 
bard (to create) is used only Avhen speaking of 
the first creation of the heavens and the earth 
(verse 1), of the creation of animals (verse 21), 
and of the creation of man (verse 27) ; elsewhere, 
the less specific word asdlt (to make) is used, or 
even more ambiguous forms of expression like 
'^Let the waters bring forth" (verse 20), which 
positively favors some form of evolution. From 
this the distinguished authority whose views we 
are considering, infers that absolute creation is 
affirmed in Genesis only at three stages ; namely, 
the beginning of the universe, the beginning of 
life, and the beginning of man, — precisely- the 
three places where all theories of evolution com- 
pletely and hopelessly break doAvn in their evi- 
dence. Thus, according to our author, "the 
question of evolution within each of these great 
systems — of matter into various forms of matter, 
of life into the various forms of life, and of man- 
kind in all its varieties — remains still open."^ 

124. On either of these theories of the inter- 
pretation of the first chapter of Genesis, it cer- 
tainly is a marvellous result that a cosmogony 
should have l)een presented at that early day in 
1 Creation, p. 128. 



HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 199 

language that can be easily interpreted so as 
to avoid conflict with the science of the present 
day. No other religious system has a cosmogony 
with which the men of science can by any possi- 
bility be at peace. 

So far, then, from finding anything in the 
cosmogony of Genesis to bear against the inspira- 
tion of the Bible, we may draw from it a powerful 
argument in favor of inspiration. In the words of 
another, '^On any other hypothesis than that of 
divine inspiration, this first chapter of Genesis, 
and in particular this account of the fifth and sixth 
days of creation, is the most unaccountable pro- 
duction ever written by the pen of man. Consider 
by whom this chapter was written. It was 
Avritten by a man who lived far back in the early 
infancv of human knowledw — a man who had 
not, and could not have, any knowledge whatever, 
any least conception or suspicion, of the actual 
reality of the vast development of which he was 
telling the story. And yet of that development, 
going on through countless ages, he has followed 
the order of events in a full and comprehensive 
outline — an outline so true and exact that not one 
mistake or defect can be pointed out in it from 
l)eginning to end. How could such a thing be? 
How did this man know that a rol)e of waters 
covered the earth before a ray of light fVom the 
sun had penetrated to its surface ? How did this 



200 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

man know that the enormous veofetation of the coal 
period had flourished two and three of the great crea- 
tive days before the higher animals were called into 
being? How did he know that it was not until the 
fourth day that the sun shone clearly upon the 
earth? How did he know that fish of every kind, 
gigantic reptiles, and birds, filled the earth on the 
fifth day; while the mammalia and man, the 
crown of all, were not called into l)eino' until the 
sixth day, at the very close of the long creative 
work? Clearl}^ he wrote better than he kncAV. 
Some vision of the grand evolution of material 
things passed before his mental eye ; and the 
story of creation as he thus saw it he has told. 
Science examines this story and finds it true and 
exact in eveiy point. What shall we say of a 
record like this, dating back to the very childhood 
of our race, j^et so strangely anticipating the 
maturest results of scientific investigation? There 
is but one thing which can be said, — a judgment 
which we are compelled to repeat with eveiy new 
examination of the sacred volume, — ^ All Scrip- 
ture is given b}^ inspiration of God.'"^ 

125. The alleged conflict between the chro- 
nology of the Bible and that of modern archaeology 
is likewise dependent upon two uncertain ele- 
ments : a. Does the Bible teach that the human race 
has been upon the earth only about six thousand 

^ Fimdaiiiental Questions, by Edson L. Clark, pp. 2G, 27. 



HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 201 

years? or, indeed, does it contain any definite 
system of chronology? 6. Have archaeologists 
proved a very great antiquity to the human race? 
To the first of these questions, whether the Bible 
is explicitly committed to a short system of chro- 
nology for the human race, we think that an 
unprejudiced examination must answer in the 
negative. It should be remembered that the 
chronological figures in the margins of our refer- 
ence Bibles were not prepared by an inspired 
writer, but by Archbishop Usher, whose chrono- 
logical scheme has by no means a clear field, but 
is one of nearly two hundred schemes drawn up 
from the fragmentary data of the Bible. It is 
easily seen, even in some of the most formal gene- 
alogies of the Bible, that the main object of the 
writer was not to furnish a complete and accurate 
chronology, but rather to indicate lines of descent 
and facts of relationship. For example, in the 
genealogy of Christ as given in Matt. i. 1-17, the 
writer doubtless knew that many links were 
omitted ; as where it is said that " Joram begat 
Ozias" (verse 8) ; whereas, if every link had been 
given according to 1 Chron. lii. 11, 12, it would 
have read "Joram he^ixt Ahaziah, Ahaziah beirat 
Joash, Joash begat Amaziah, and Amaziah begat 
Ozias." A still more instructive case occurs in 
Ezra, where Azariah is called the '' son of Merai- 
oth," and this in a genealogical table; whereas, 
accordins: to 1 Chron. vi. 7-11, Azariah was the 



202 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

sixth generation from Meraioth. Again, in 1 
Chron. xxvi. 24, we read: "Shebuel the son of 
Gershom, the son of Moses, was ruler of the 
treasures." This was in David's time, several 
hundred years after Moses. Yet Gershom was 
the son of Moses, while Shebuel was twelve or 
fifteen generations from the person w^hose son he 
is said to be ; and this the writer, and those for 
whom he wrote, must have known. ^ 

From this it is plain that the Jews, like other 
oriental nations, introduced their o:enealooical 
tables not so much to furnish an accurate chro- 
nology in years as to emphasize the fact of lineal 
descent and consanguinity ; so that we even find 
it said in Gen. x. 15-18 that Canaan begat not 
only two individuals that are mentioned, but also 
nine tribes or nations Avhich are specified! Such 
are the indefinite materials from which the so- 
called systems of biblical chronology are made 
out. From which it is clear that chronology Avas 
not one of the things which the Bible set out to 
teach, but that the sacred writers have left the 
subject so open that it will be very diflScult for 
archaeologists to come into collision with the gen- 
eral chronological statements of the Scripture, 
even if it should be proved that the human race 
had been in the Avorld a great many thousand 
years. 

1 See the author's Studies in Science and Religion, pp. 371- 
377. 



HARMONY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. 203 

126. And, on the other hand, the enormous 
antiquity claimed for the human race by some 
writers on archaeology is far from being an estab- 
lished fact. It still remains true that the histori- 
cal monuments of Egypt and Assyria cannot be 
proved to be more than five thousand years old ; 
and the evidences of palaeolithic man, which are the 
earliest vestiges of the human race yet discovered 
or likely to be discovered, and which probably, 
both in Europe and America, antedate the close of 
the glacial period, are by no means so ancient as 
some have supposed. Indeed, evidence of great 
force is accumulating to show that the ice of the 
glacial period did not withdraw from the northern 
part of the United States at a period much more 
than eight thousand years ago.^ 

Thus it appears that, come what may, the chro- 
nology of the Bible and the chronology of the ar- 
chaeologists Avill have little difficulty in adjusting 
themselves to each other, for that of the Bible can 
easily be lengthened out to meet any demands 
which archaeology is likely to make upon it. And 
here, again, in this freedom from positive state- 
ments upon unessential points — so characteristic 
of the Bible — we find evidence of a ofuidinsr and 
restraining hand that we cannot be amiss m be- 
lieving to be divine. 

1 See an article by the author on The Niagara Gorge as a 
Chronometer in the Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. xli. pp. 369-376 ; 
also Chap. vi. in Studies in Science and Keligion. 



204 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 



XIII. 

PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE SAID TO BE INSIGNIFI- 
CANT OR UNWORTHY OF INSPIRATION. 

127. Reference has already been made ^ to the 
similarity between the criticisms upon the doctrine 
of design in nature and those upon the doctrine of 
inspiration in Scripture. In nature, as m Scrip- 
ture, there are many things which seem too insig- 
nificant to be ascribed to the agency of God. For 
example, in the most perfect animals there are 
many rudimentary and apparently useless parts. 
The whale has seven vertebrae in his neck, so thin 
and compressed that a single vertebra would seem 
to have been sufficient. The young calf has teeth 
in the front part of his upper jaw which never cut 
through the gums. The horse has several bones 
about his ankle that seem to serve no purpose, but 
are rather an encumbrance and an occasion of dis- 
ease. The vermiform appendix is in man an 
extension of the large intestine for which physi- 
oloo^ists can see no use ; l)ut, on the other hand, 
it is frequently the occasion of disease and death. 

1 Paragraph 68. 



PARTS ALLEGED. TO BE UNWORTHY. 205 

In the vegetable world there are innumerable 
phenomena to which we can ascribe no purpose, 
except by falling back upon principles of faith. 
The pollen .annually produced by pine-grains and 
willow trees, and the spores continually thrown off 
from fungi and other very low organisms, are 
well-nigh innumerable, and immensely beyond all 
ordinary demand ; and so of seeds in general. 
Though apparently every seed is designed for 
growth, yet myriads upon myriads annually perish 
where one finds its way to conditions favorable to 
growth. A large class of writers at the present 
diiy criticise nature on account of this waste, and 
aflSrm that such waste cannot be an element of 
design. The brief answer to such objections is, 
that the designs of God in nature are too compre- 
hensive and complex for man to compass them in 
their entirety. Yet so much purpose is apparent 
in nature that it is very unreasonable for the 
human mind to deny design in the obscure por- 
tions of nature, since perhaps they seem obscure 
only because man is both so limited in his natural 
capacities and so immature in his development, 
that his intellectual vision does not penetrate many 
regions of thought which are still open to higher 
intelligences, and may at some time be open to 
him. It is the part of human wisdom to take a 
low place among the critics of the divine work- 
manship. Nature is designed as a whole, and the 



206 THE DIVINE AUTHORKTY OF THE BIBLE. 

perfection of its parts is not absolute, but relative.^ 
That which is perfection in the pollen of the pine- 
tree is not the perfection pertaining to the pollen 
of an orchid ; for in each case there is a correla- 
tion between the quantity of pollen produced and 
the means by which it is transported to its place 
of fertilization. In one case the wind is depended 
upon to transport it, and the pollen grains have to 
be more numerous than the chances of failure, in 
order to secure the proper amount of fertilization. 
In seeds, also, which are dependent upon natural 
agencies for transportation, there is endless diver- 
sity in the means provided. Evidently it is the 
Creator's design that many troublesome weeds 
should have great facility of self-propagation. The 
thistle is provided with a downy tuft of sufficient 
levity to float the seed in the air, and avail itself 
of wind-transportation. Burrs of various kinds 
are specially adapted to adhere to the feathers of 
birds, the fur and wool of animals, and thereby to 
avail themselves of every method of animal trans- 
portation. Thus seeds are transported with costly 
furs, alons: all the lines of traffic throuoh which 
flows the commerce of the Hudson's Bay Com- 
pany. Thus, also, the wool merchant is the means 
of transporting to England and France seeds native 
to California, Australia, and South America. 

1 See the author's Studies in Science and Keligion, pp. 165- 
255. 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 207 

128. We fire not permitted to judge of the 
design of any minute portion of nature by the part 
it seems to us to play at the present moment. 
Nature is a vast storehouse of divine adaptation 
desisfned for all time. The naturalist now sees in 
the numerous rudimentary organs to which we 
have already called attention striking marks of 
design directly operative in the past ; and these 
marks are still of inestimable value to the human 
mind as indexes which reveal the handiwork of 
God in former times. Nor do we know the exigen- 
cies of the future sufEciently to affirm with confi- 
dence that every appendage which now seems to 
be useless must always be useless. We are bound 
to reason about the plans of God as we would 
about the plans of a far-seeing statesman. He 
would be foolish indeed who in time of profound 
peace should decide that all the preparations of 
the navy-j^ard and arsenal were superfluous. 

129. In criticising particular portions of the 
Bible we are bound to consider the complexity of 
the service the Bible is designed to render. The 
Bible is like a ship making a long V03^age5 passing 
alternately from temperate zone to torrid, and 
thence through temperate to frigid, and back again. 
In judging of the wisdom of each particular portion 
of its outfit, all the vicissitudes of the voyage must 
be taken into account. The wisdom of the ship- 
builder is not alone seen in the flying pennants and 



208 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

the figure-head, but also in the various internal 
arrangements giving strength and capacity to the 
vessel, and providing for the convenience, health, 
and comfort of the passengers and crew. Viewed 
from this aspect, it will be found difficult to prove 
that any portions of the Bible are either unnecessary 
or unworthy. If the Bible was to be adapted to 
human wants, it must have a human side complete 
and perfect. It is by the complete incorporation 
of all human methods of expressing truth that the 
Bible is made an intelligible and adequate revela- 
tion of the divine will ; and to criticise the Bible, 
because it employs every device of language and 
literature by which truth is conveyed from one 
mind to another, is to hoist ourselves with our own 
petard, and to reveal the fallibilit}" of our own logic 
rather than the imperfection of the Bible. 

130. Under this head it is proper to remark 
upon various alleged literary infelicities of Scrip- 
ture which in many cases are thought even to 
obscure its meaning. For example, much of the 
teaching of the Bible is indirect, — a principle 
being taught not by plain precept, but by an illus- 
tration or an example in which we are simply 
aided to the discovery of the specific course of 
duty by considering the example in the light of 
our own reason and experience. It is thus that 
we have l)een left to learn the full extent of the 
evils of slavery and of the use of alcoholic bever- 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 209 

ages. A little attention shows, however, that the 
relations of life are so complex that it is difficult 
to state many of the rules of conduct in anything 
more than a general form ; and it is impossible to 
embody the principles of divine action in any 
single statement which shall not be liable to mis- 
understanding. 

For example, the teaching of the Book of Job 
is not wholly contained in the words ascribed to 
the Lord, but the signification and effect of these 
divine Avords depend in great measure upon the 
discordant dialogue of uninspired men which has 
preceded. The preacher would indeed make a 
grave mistake if he quoted the words of Bildad or 
of Satan as if they in themselves contained the 
truth of God. But being professedly put in the 
mouths of persons whose character is known, their 
relation to the whole book becomes evident 
enough, — they are the intensified darkness of the 
background from which streams the light of God ; 
they are the temporary notes of discord out of 
which by the divine touch arises the celestial har- 
mony of the whole. 

131. It is somewhat thus that we may regard 
a large portion of the Book of Proverbs. Some 
of the proverbs are said to be below the standard 
of the ordinary wise sayings of the East. It should 
be remembered, however, that we cannot judge 
the separate portions of the book apart from the 



210 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Avliole, but must remember that, like the body 
spoken of by Paul, a collection of wise sayings 
has many members, and those members which 
seem to be more feeble may yet be necessary. 
The eyes may be more honorable in themselves 
than the finger nails. Nevertheless, we are better 
off with two eyes and ten perfect fingers than we 
should be with a dozen eyes and a supply of 
imperfect fingers. It is not perfection in litera- 
ture to have every sentence striking and brilliant. 
Let any one attempt to eliminate from the Book 
of Proverbs the portions sometimes said to be of 
inferior worth, and he will find that his selection 
of choice proverbs will not be read and enjoyed as 
much as the whole book is now. Too much 
sweetness may cloy the appetite. Too much 
brightness dazzles the vision. We may readily 
admit all that is said about the inferiority in some 
respects, of the Book of Esther to Pilgrim's 
Progress, or of Solomon's Songs to the Westmins- 
ter Catechism, and yet maintain that both Esther 
and Solomon's Songs may be perfectly fitted to 
complete the circle of literary impression which a 
divine written revelation needed to make ; whereas, 
neither of those valuable human productions would 
serve the purpose. There is doubtless a greater 
range of truth in Baxter's Saints' Rest than in the 
Book of Ecclesiastes ; but Baxter's light is bor- 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 211 

rowed light, while Ecclesiastes belongs to the 
self-luminous constellations of the sky. 

132. Among the trifling matters sometimes 
spoken of as unworthy of being regarded as the 
products of inspiration, are such incidents as Paul's 
directing Timothy to bring with him the cloak that 
he left at Troas with Carpus, and the books, es- 
pecially the parchments;^ and his advice to 
Timothy to drink no longer water, but a little wine 
for his stomach's sake and often infirmities.^ Such 
objectors forget how largely human life is made up 
of small things, and of how much our comfort de- 
pends upon attention to them. A revelation from 
God that did not come in human costume, and that 
was not penetrated with the spirit of human sym- 
pathy, would be ill adapted to its purpose, and 
would be like a Saviour who should have come 
neither eating nor drinking, and subject to no 
ordinary temptations. But as it behooved Christ to 
take upon him not the form of angels, but of the 
sons of Abraham, and to be tempted in all respects 
as we are, yet without sin ; so it behooves the 
divine revelation to be altogether human in its 
form, except that it give no positive countenance 
to error. Even as a matter of literature, Paul's 
request for the cloak is a most effective means of 
revealing to us the hardships and the haste of his 
laboiious ministry. His heart was burdened with 

1 2 Tim. iv. 13. ^ x Tim. v. 23. 



212 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

sympathy for his co-laborers, and he avoided as 
much as possible being a brnxlen to them. He 
wrought no miracles for his own advantage, and 
commended prudence as a virtue. If it is im- 
portant to have the inner experience of such a man 
revealed to us at all, it could scarcely be done in a 
more effective way than by securing a record of 
these two simple requests.^ 

Nor would we set aside the record in 1 Cor. i. 
14-17 as an unworthy product of divine inspira- 
tion. (^^^ " I thank God that I baptized none of 
you, save Crispus and Gains ; ^^'^^ lest any man 
should say that ye were baptized into my name. 
(^^^And I baptized also the household of Stephanas : 
besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 
(17)Pqi. Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach 
the gospel : not in wisdom of words, lest the cross 
of Christ should be made void." 

The doctrine of inspiration does not imply that 
the writers were omniscient, but only that they 
were divinely guided to the utterance, in the best 
form, of ttiose moral and religious truths most 
necessary to the edification of the church and the 
conversion of the world. Now, with regard to the 
passage under consideration, B}^ what means, we 
ask, could the supreme importance of the substance 
of the gospel above the form be better enforced 
than l)y this forgetfulness of the apostle as to whom 
1 See AVoods on Inspiration, p. 32. 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 213 

he had baptized ? His forgetfuhiess of those rela- 
tively insignificant facts reveals their relative in- 
significance. 

133. Or, turning to Old Testament history, 
How is it possible to prove that the story of Jonah 
is umvorthy of the place it has occupied in the re- 
ligious instruction of Jews and Christians for these 
more than two thousand years ? or to show that 
there will not be equal need of it for the two 
thousand years to come ? And the moral of the 
story certainly depends upon its truth. The story 
of the children who mocked Elisha, and were eaten 
by bears, is often objected to as unworthy of a 
place in an inspired record of revelation. Such 
objectors forget the vast range of influence the 
Bible is designed to exert. It is sometimes said, 
that such stories were good for rudS and barbarous 
ages, but the civilized world has long outgrown 
the need of them. The fact, however, is, that rude 
and l)arbarous people are still a vast majority of 
the world, and every human being is born a bar- 
barian, and passes through a stage of experience 
when the truth administered throuHi these stransfe 
incidents would make but little impression apart 
from them, or others like them to take their place. 

134. It is proper to remark in a similar strain 
ui)on thg " imprecatory Psalms " and the divine 
commands for the destruction l)y Israel of the 
abominal)le and besotted native tribes of Canaan. 



214 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

That these are not mere acts of vindictiveness is 
evident enouo'h, both from the s^eneral forbearance 
and orentleness of the character of David ^ and of 
the Mosaic code,^ and from the recorded delay in 
the infliction of judgment upon the Amorites, be- 
cause their cup of iniquity was not yet full.^ In 
justification of the exterminating wars of Canaan 
it is suflicient to observe that they are by divine 
command, when an imperative necessity existed to 
keep the chosen people free from contact with the 
cruel and licentious idolatry of the period ; and it 
is not too much to say that, as a result of this iso- 
lation of Israel, and of the abhorrence of idolatry 
created by it, all those sublime ideas of God's 
unity and holiness wrought in Jewish history 
have been preserved which are so indispensable, 
both to a correct apprehension of Christianity and 
to the moral progress of the world. Whether we 
can preserve a suiEciently high ideal of holiness 
and justice and righteousness without the continual 
study of these histories may well be questioned. 
Those who regard these stern facts of Old Testa- 

1 1 Sara, xxiv., xxvi. 

2 The apparent severity of the Mosaic code is siraply its 
faithfulness in the infliction of deserved punishment. For the 
kindness and consideration shown by it to strangers, see Ex. 
xii. 49; xxii. 21; xxiii. 9, 12; Lev. xxiv. 22; Num. ix. 14; xv. 15, 
16, 29; XXXV. 15; Deut. i. 16; x. 18, 19; xxvi. 12. For the 
humaneness of the code in general, see an article by Prof. J. B. 
Sewall in Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. xix. p. 368. 

2 Gen. XV. 16. 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 215 

ment history as unworthy to be compared with the 
precepts of Christ, are called upon to show that 
they can by any other means so effectuall}^ keep 
alive in the world a sense of the true nature of sin 
as by compelling successive generations to har- 
monize these facts of Old Testament history with 
their conceptions of God's nature, character, and 
responsibilities. We are in constant danger of 
losing our sense of the personality of God and o'f 
the deep-seated guilt of human nature. The de- 
struction of human life by natural forces is not so 
uncommon an occurrence that we should be startled 
at the taking of life by divine command ; for nature 
is but God's executioner. It is no uncommon 
thing for nations and races to pass into decline and 
utter decay. The volcano, tlie earthquake, the 
tornado, and the pestilence annually devour their 
countless victims. But, though they are really 
God's messengers, they do not speak to man with 
a personal voice, and their destruction falls alike 
upon the evil and upon the good, reminding us 
rather of the uncertainty of life than of the guilt 
of individuals. In those vast destructions of 
human life which follow by natural law in the 
wake of improvidence and intemperance, their true 
nature as the retribution of a personal God is dis- 
guised under the effects of natural law. But in 
the destruction of the Canaanites by the command 
of the Lord, and in the representative utterances 



216 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

of the psalmist when, from the high plane of his 
sympathy with God in his efforts to bring in the 
reign of righteousness, he poured out his invec- 
tives against the persistent and implacable enemies 
of God's kingdom, we are brought face to face 
with the terrible realities of sin. In the ono:oino^s 
of nature nothing seems so cheap as human life. 
It may well be doubted if ever there was a better 
investment made in sacrificing human life than in 
the wholesale destruction of the antediluvians of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, of the idolatrous inhabitants 
of Canaan, and of the forty children ^ whose mock- 
ing words at Elisha were an index of the moral 
condition of the hamlet in which they lived. 

We do not say that these things are to be re- 
peated. We acquiesce in them as deeds which we 
believe to be justified by special divine command 
in adaptation to peculiar exigencies in human his- 
tory. As such it is of vital importance to keep 
hold of them as focts of experience which perpet- 
ually warn us that all sinners deserve to perish. 

135. It used to be the style to make light of 
the list of patriarchs and the ethnological tables 
in Genesis, the minute ceremonial requirements of 
the Mosaic law, and the genealogical tables of 
Kings and Chronicles. But now these have be- 
come the first portions of the Bible to which 

1 The Hebrew word naar, however, may mean a fiill-gj'own 
vouni^ man, or a servant, or a soldier. 



PARTS ALLEGED TO BE UNWORTHY. 217 

archaeologists and antiquarians give attention, and 
these apparently unworthy parts become the golden 
hooks in the tabernacle upon which costly curtains 
are hung ; ^ while the repetitions and minuti^ of 
the Mosaic code seem likely to play a most im- 
portant part in establishing the historic character 
of the code itself. We should not lightl}^ cast any 
part of the Bible aside as of little value. When 
we attempt to criticise the Bible we are in danger 
of making the mistake of an unskilled mechanic in 
criticising a complicated machine. Even an un- 
skilled workman can see that the machine as a 
whole is wisely designed. But when shown a par- 
ticular bolt or bar from an obscure portion of the 
machine he might not discern its use at all. He 
ought, however, to believe that it is of use because 
of its forming a part of what he knows to be, on 
the whole, a product of design. The so-called in- 
ternal evidences of the divine origin of the Bible 
are not to be applied to its minute portions. We 
can see the superior excellence of the whole, and 
on account of that can believe in the excellence of 
some portions whose function we do not fully com- 
prehend. 

1 Ex. xxvi. 6. 



218 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 



XIY. 

CONCLUSION. 

136. The method of argument upon which we 
have depended to prove the divhie authorit}^ of 
the Bible is that ordinarily used by natural philos- 
ophers in the inductive sciences. In their efforts 
to discover the laws of nature these philosophers 
pursue two methods, of which one is called the 
" method of agreement," the other, the ' ' method of 
difference." For instance, suppose the problem is 
to find the immediate cause of the cholera. A 
large number of cases occur in a great variet}^ of 
circumstances. One famil^^ has the disease while 
living in a cellar ; another, while living in a fashion- 
able house. One person has it who has been care- 
less in his diet ; another person has it who has 
o'uarded his diet with extreme care. One has it 
while travelling ; another when at home. To de- 
termine the real cause of this disease it is necessary 
to search for that condition Avhich is common to all 
the cases. The condition of the patients differed 
in many respects. If that experience can be found 
in Avhich they agreed before the disease attacked 



CONCLUSION. 219 

them, some progress will be made toward a deter- 
mination of the cause of the disease. We have at 
any rate eliminated from the problem many things 
which are not causes, and so have narrowed the 
field of inquiry. 

137. But as these cases may have agreed in 
some unknown respect which was the cause of the 
disease, the investigator is compelled to employ 
another process in connection with the foregoing, 
namely, what is called the '' method of difierence." 
He observes the cases of persons whose situation 
is simihir in all respects except that supposed to 
be the producing cause of the disease and notes if 
the addition of that one cause uniformly tends to 
produce the disease, and if the abatement of that 
cause uniformly tends to a diminution of it. 

By properly observing and applying these two 
rules, one after another of the conditions that have 
no connection with the production of the disease 
can be so far eliminated from the problem that at 
last the exact cause may be cietermined. Note 
how these methods apply to the argument for the 
inspiration of the Bible. 

138. Let us first recount the phenomena. The 
Bible is a sacred book composed of upwards of 
sixty distinct productions, written by forty or more 
different writers distributed through a period of 
al)out two thousand years. These separate pro- 
ductions comprise almost every kind of literature — 



220 THE DIVINE AUTHOKITY OF THE BIBLE. 

history, biography, poetry, collections of legal 
maxims and principles, proverbs, hymns, sermons, 
.and prayers, together with extended discussions of 
the profoLindest and most abstruse philosophical 
questions. These writings were addressed in part 
to a rude people in rude ages, in part to the most 
cultivated and philosophic ages and races of the 
world. The Bible is made attractive to all classes 
and conditions of men. There is no other book so 
well calculated as the Bible is to interest and in- 
struct children from generation to generation ; and, 
on the other hand, there is no other book that can 
so exercise the mind of the philosopher and scholar. 
The greatest minds the world has ever produced 
have from time immemorial taxed themselves in 
vain to fathom the depths of its meaning. The 
historian, the student of geography and ethnology, 
the statesman, the poet, find within the lids of the 
Bible richer mines of wealth in their respective 
spheres of investigation than any other book 
affords. When the heart is borne down with sad- 
ness and enveloped in the shades of disappoint- 
ment, there is no language like that of Dnvid or 
Jeremiah with which to give vent to the pent-up 
feelings. Or when joy and hope thrill the soul, 
there are none others that can equal Isaiah and 
the writer of the llevelation in jul)ilant songs of 
gladness. But for the Bible there could have been 
no Hallelujah Chorus. 



CONCLUSION. 221 

Such is the diversity apparent in the books of 
the Bible. Yet amid this diversity there is a most 
impressive unity. The Bible is not made up of 
unconnected fragments. There are bricks and 
mortar and wood and stone. But these are joined 
together to form one building. There were diverse 
builders in times far separated, yet they developed 
one plan. There are foundation, wall, arch, key- 
stone, and spire. The Bible is one as much as 
St. Peter's church at Rome is one. The Bible, 
notwithstanding the great variety of authors, is not 
marred by unnatural excrescences. 

139. When the mistakes of transcribers and 
interpreters have been eliminated from the Bible, 
it cannot be shown to contain any errors. The 
Bible endures the searching criticism of this age as 
no other book does. Its history is unimpeached. 
None of its numerous geographical references can 
be proved to be erroneous. Its allusions to man- 
ners and customs are Avithout mistake. Its scien- 
tific references are made with such caution that it 
avoids conflict with the discoveries of modern 
times. 

In these respects it diflfers from other books. 
There is no other series of histories of one-tenth 
the compass of the Bible that stands criticism as 
it does. There is no other sacred book that has 
kept itself free from conflict with the startling 
developments of modern science. There is no 



222 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

other book that has grown like the Bible and 
maintained its symmetry. There is no other book 
treating of man's rehitions to God in a manner that 
has continued to command the respect of men in 
such diverse conditions and at such widely sepa- 
rated periods. 

140. With these facts before us, we seek in 
the manner of modern philosophers for their pro- 
ducino' cause. What has secured this acknowleda'ed 
and multifarious perfection? What secured the 
perfection of development manifest in the i)lan of 
the Bible in which the law, the history, the rites 
and ceremonies and liturgies of w^orship, the 
prophecies, and the life, death, and doctrines of 
Christ are indissolubl}^ one? Who fitted the life 
of Christ into the framework prepared b}' the Old 
Testament history ? Unaided human agency could 
not have done it. The arch of unity which the 
Bible contains stretches across too many centuries, 
and rises too high, to be the work of man. Look 
at it. Patchwork shows itself. We might better 
suppose that St. Peter's at Eome assumed its s^^m- 
metrical proportions through the unsuperintended 
work of an army of hod-carriers and stonemasons 
than to suppose the grand and imposing symmetry 
of the Bible was the result of the work of fort}^ 
men laboring, in as many half centuries, without 
the superintendence of the divine power. Nor is 
this synnnetry of the Bible in all its parts hard to 



CONCLUSION. . 223 

discover ; but it stands out boldly and attracts the 
notice of all its beholders. Neither does any 
amount of study dissipate its apparent unity and 
make it appear an ilkision. 

141. Again we ask : Who kept forty men in as 
many half centuries from making any mistakes in 
historical and geographical references ? Does any 
one say, They kept themselves? But scarcely a 
single one of other ancient Avriters is free from mis- 
takes when touching at any length upon these sub- 
jects. Why, unless the Holy Spirit granted them 
aid, should these forty men stand the criticism of 
modern discoverers better than any other one man 
who wrote at any length upon similar themes? 
What kept these forty religious writers, in as many 
half centuries, from drao'Sfino; into their books as 
essential elements of them the crudities of the phi- 
losophy and i)hysical science of their times? If 
histor}^ teaches anything it teaches that the temp- 
tation for religious founders to dogmatize upon 
the phenomena of the physical world is well-nigh 
irresistible. In the lio^ht of what other relio^ious 
founders have done, the chances are a million to 
one that forty men writing in such diverse periods, 
would have disfigured their work in a simihir man- 
ner with crude and silly speculations, had they not 
been guided by a superior intelligence. Again, 
What kept these forty writers so uniformly from 
fulsome flattery of their heroes? They give his- 



224 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

tories of Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, of a 
long list of kings of Israel and Judali, professedly 
the chosen instruments of the Lord in developing 
his plan of redemption ; yet they cover up no sin 
of their heroes — gloss over no baseness of char- 
acter. What power kept so many writers from 
flattering royalty, as Virgil flattered Augustus? 
What restrained the apostles from nonsensical 
speculations concerning the childhood of Jesus? 
What kept their records of his miracles from swel- 
ling to unnatural proportions? The apocryphal 
Gospels abound in absurd and silly accounts of 
Christ's conduct when a child. The miracles alleged 
to have been performed by certain saints and the 
shrines of the mediaeval church were multiplied to 
such extent as to rob them of all effect. 

^Ye may have fallen into error in some of the 
minor facts upon which our present conclusion is 
based, but an error or two where so many facts 
bear in the same direction would not materially dis- 
turb the force of the argument. We are search- 
ing for a cause of peculiar phenomena. One factor 
we know. We know the weakness of man. We 
know how liable he is to mistakes in geography, 
history, ethnology, and physical science — how 
feeble is his grasp of the systems of philosophy 
which men before him have promulgated. We 
know how incompetent he is to judge of what is 
permanent and what is transient in the ideas of his 



CONCLUSION. 225 

time. We know how easily men are oYermastered 
by the greatness and strangeness of such ideas as 
form the principal themes of the Bible. From the 
Tahnud and the Targums we know the tempta- 
tion the Jewish rabbis were under to multiply rules 
and speculations till then- very size should make 
them unwieldy and useless. From the writings of 
the Christian commentators on the Bible, — early, 
mediaeval, and modern, — we know how surely 
man of his own accord loads the truth so heavily 
with his speculations that it sinks altogether in 
the sea of forgetful ness. In repeated instances the 
truth has been so deeply buried beneath frivolous 
notes, insipid exhortations, fitted at best only for 
personal and temporal service, that the labor of 
unearthing it from these voluminous Avorks of the 
commentators is appalling. Thousands of commen- 
taries have been written on the Book of Romans 
alone. These characteristic and centrifugal ten- 
dencies when operating in the human mind we 
know. We discover, however, in our Sacred 
Scriptures evidences of another tendencj^ re- 
vealing the presence of a power from without 
modifying in a peculiar manner the movements 
of those minds that wrote tlie books of the 
Bible. The problem is to detect and define that 
power. 

142. The astronomers once had a similar prob- 
lem before them. The motions of the planet 



226 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

Uranus were found not to conform to the motions 
which would be produced by the known forces in 
operation. What eftect the attraction of the sun 
and of the other phmets would have upon it could 
be calculated. But when these had been ex- 
hausted there still remained a residuum of effect 
unaccounted for. From those data the astrono- 
mers calculated the size, position, and movements 
of a planet, exterior to Uranus, Avhose attraction 
would explain the irregularities. The telescope 
was turned in that direction, and the planet 
revealed itself. Neptune, revolving in an orbit 
two thousand million of miles distant, was discov- 
ered, and the mystery solved. Something such is 
the problem before us in this discussion. "\Ve 
contemplate in the construction of the Bible the 
movements not of one mind writinof on relio^ious 
subjects, and giving evidence of disturbance or 
control from without. We have before us not the 
orbit of one planet moving as if in obedience to the 
attraction of a central sun, but we have fortj/ 
minds in different ao-es of the world, o'ivino- evi- 
dence of a uniform control by some external 
power. We see fortj^ planets moving in well- 
defined and uniform orbits. Does it need much 
calculation to assure us that that disturbing power, 
that attractive force which produces the harmon}^ 
of movement visible in the sacred writers, is the 
promised power of God? The enlightened nations 



CONCLUSION. 227 

of the world continue for the most part to explain 
the phenomenon upon that theory. 

143. This view is rendered almost absolutely 
certain when we observe that these writers re- 
peatedly affirm that they believe themselves under 
inspiration of God — a belief which is of itself 
enough to unbalance any ordinary mind. In 
this belief we have brouo;ht to lio:ht a centrifu- 
gal force of such strength that, except for the 
special control of the divine power, it would force 
the bodies under consideration completely out of 
their orbits. Forty madmen or impostors or self- 
deceived teachers could not exhibit such persistent 
consistency and freedom from error and extrava- 
gance on so many points where error and ex- 
travao'ance can easilv be detected. 

144. Nor is it simply to the providential care 
displayed in preserving the Avriters of the Bible 
from error and extravagance that the appeal is 
made. There is also a providence manifested in 
the preservation of the Bible itself. Our English 
version was translated from an edition of the New 
Testament that is not now reckoned b}^ any schol- 
ars as of much worth in a critical point of view. 
jNIodern investigations have brought a flood of 
h'ght to bear upon the determination of the true 
text of the Bible since our translation was made. 
Manuscripts have l)een gathered and collated from 
all quarters of the ancient world, and of ages 



228 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

nearest that of the apostles. Versions that were 
made into various languages at a very early period 
have been compared, and single texts that were 
cited from the Bible by early preachers and winters 
have been gathered from their voluminous produc- 
tions. And yet, with all this microscopic examina- 
tion, there are few material changes to be made in 
the text from which our translation w^as rendered, 
with such integrity has it been handed down to us I 
The chano;es made in the revision of the Ensflish 
translation of 1881 cause scarcel}^ a ripple in the 
discussions of doctrinal theology. 

145. Here, w^e submit, is such a combination 
of evidences pointing to the divine origin and 
providential preservation of the Bible as to be 
absolutely irresistible. In the production and 
preservation of the Bible we behold the working 
of a power that far transcends any power of which 
man alone is capable. 

The supposition that God would bestow such 
care to secure, in the Bible, accuracy of detail and 
freedom from human extravagances on points where 
the inaccuracies and extravao^ances can be tested 
by us, while allowing its teachings concerning the 
spiritual world which we have no means of testing 
to be false, is absurd ; for it aims a blow at God's 
veracity. If God is honest in his dealings w^ith 
men, he would not impress such manifold and 
indisputable marks of his care in the minor details 



CONCLUSION. 229 

of the revelation, and leave the spiritual truth, 
which we cannot test by scientific means, in am- 
biguous phrases. These marks of divine care in 
the production and preservation of the Bible, which 
we can see and test, are the divine seal upon the 
whole. They are the superscription of God, certi- 
fying that the metal upon which they are impressed 
is pure gold. We might not be able to test the 
metal for ourselves, but we can read the super- 
scription — we can recognize the stamp. 

146. Thus far we have proceeded in the induc- 
tive method of proof. We have examined the 
things in which we can determine the law of 
procedure. When we reach the point w^here our 
experiment and observation fail, and consider the 
revelations concerning the eternal world insepara- 
bly mingled Avith all portions of the Bible, shall 
w^e say the law^ abruptly ceases its action, and 
that God did not continue his supervision further? 
That would be to say that God cares for the shell, 
and not for the kernel. That would be to ac- 
knowledge that God remembered the hairs of the 
head and noted the sparrow's fall, but ignored the 
deepest of all the wants implanted in man's nature. 
When the inductive reasoner has proved that a 
law of attraction pervades the solar system, con- 
trolling the planets and their satellites, it is not 
counted credulous to extend the law to the whole 
material creation. The same imperative duty 



230 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

rests upon us in our treatment of the Bible. Wa 
cannot arbitrarily stop at a certain point, and 
acknowledge that while a law of providential care 
has manifestly ruled so far it does not go be- 
yond into fields where we are ignorant. The 
law being once established by induction we may 
reason from it deductivel3^ We are not now 
driven to the necessity of determining the wisdom 
of each detached doctrine and passage by itself. 
The evidence that sustains the Scriptures as a 
whole gives weight to every detached portion. 
The testimony of Christ and the apostles to the 
authority of the Old Testament, their acceptance 
of it as the word of God, in the sense in which 
the Jews accepted it, is the strongest direct 
proof we can have of the divine authority of the 
Old Testament. And the promise to the apostles 
that the Holy Spirit should speak through them, 
and the acknowledgment by the apostolic church 
of the books of the New Testament as of equal 
authority with the Old Testament, is the most 
weighty direct testimony we can have that the 
New Testament is a reA-elation from God. Each 
particular part that is proved to be genuine has 
the weio'ht of authoritv which is accredited to the 
whole. As the apostle says : '^ Every Scrip- 
ture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, 
for reproof, for correction, for instruction which 
is in righteousness."^ 

1 2 Tim. iii. IG. 



CONCLUSION. 231 

So far, our argument has been addressed to 
those who are laboring under doubt, and who are 
candidly examining the ground on which they are 
asked to accept the doctrines of the Bible which 
are beyond the reach of unaided reason — such as, 
for example, the doctrines of immortality, of 
prayer, of salvation by Jesus Christ, of the work 
of the Holy Spirit, and of future retribution. To 
those who will accept these doctrines, and apply 
themselves to seek by prayer and faith the ex- 
periences which the doctrines profess to confer, 
the truth may be confirmed by actual experiment. 
The reasons adduced in the foreo;oino' aro-ument 
point, like the mathematical calculations of Adams 
and Leverrier, to an attracting power beyond us. 
AVe have l)ut to turn our believing eyes in the 
direction pointed, and we shall see, as those as- 
tronomers saw, the orb itself. 

How surpassingly glorious is that orb which 
the Christian beholds ! In spiritual vision he 
beholds the Son of God ! God himself visits the 
true l)eliever, and consoles and comforts him, and 
lifts from him the burden of guilt which rested on 
his conscience. The assurances which the believer 
possesses of the truth of God's word cannot indeed 
be directly imparted to others. Nevertheless, this 
united evidence of the church as to the peculiar 
joy and satisfaction they find in accepting the 
teachings of the Scriptures is not without its 



232 THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE. 

weight in convincing the Avorld that the Bible is 
inspired of God. The word of God accomplishes 
what it promises in this life to the guilty soul 
that trusts it. This is certainly no small addi- 
tional evidence that its promises and threatenings 
respecting the future world are trustworthy. 

147. If one is so fortunate as to possess the 
Bible, his chief work in constructing his religious 
faith will consist of interpretation. The great 
question is, "What does the Bible mean?" What 
prominence is given in it to the various phases of 
truth ? What is the s}' stem which underlies its 
development and teaching? Particular texts are 
not to be detached from their connection and in- 
terpreted as if they stood alone — part is to be 
compared with part ; Scripture is to be understood 
by Scripture. The Bible is not to be lightl3^ ^^^ 
aside by any one. Its divine sanction claims for it 
a most exalted place in our*affections and study. 
And the soul may lean upon its promises with un- 
wavering contidcnce when death dra^vs near, and 
when all human supports ftiil. He who builds 
upon it may fearlessly gaze into the dim vistas 
of eternity. For God has spoken. In that Word 
we hear his voice from the darkness, saying, ''It is 
I ; peace ; be still." Keason and philosophy have 
no such inspiring and authentic voice. 



INDEX. 



Accommodation, theory of, 48 ; not 
applicable to Christ's endorse- 
ment of the Old Testament, 49 ; 
nor of Paul's quotations, 117 ; 
true, 164sq. ; false, 166sq. 

Accuracy of the Bible, 221. 

Agnosticism., apologetic use of, 130. 

Alexandria, catechetical school of, 
75. 

Alexandrian manuscript, age of, 87. 

Analogy bet\yeen, doctrine of de- 
sign and of inspiration, 157sq., 
204 ; inspiration and incarnation, 
211 ; Bible and nature, 215. 

Analogy of faith, 106, 129. 

Antilegomena, 74. 

Antiochus Epiphanes, relation of 
his persecutions to the canon, 69. 

Apocalypse of Peter, 75. 

Apocalyptic literature, 47. 

Apocrypha of the New Testament, 
75, 81, 154, 224. 

Apocrypha of the Old Testament, 
books of, enumerated, 47 ; dis- 
carded by Josephus, 64 ; by Philo, 
64 ; by Origen, 65 ; by Jerome, 
65 ; by Protestants, 67 ; seldom 
quoted by the fathers, 66 ; Bis- 
sell's views of, 66sq. ; doctrine 
and character of, 67, 83. 

Apocryphal Gospels, 81. 

Apostles, their commission and 
authority, 18sq., 178 ; neglect of 
apocalyptic literature, 47 ; Teach- 
ing of the, referred to, 66 ; their 
interpretation of the Old Testa- 
ment, llOsq. 

Apostolic authorship of the New 
Testament, 82. 

Apostolic church, view of, con- 
cerning Christ's nature, 121sq. ; 
view of, regarding inspiration, 
122sq. ; expected the speedy re- 
turn of Christ, 127. 

Aramaic, the language of Christ, 
173, 104. 

Argument for inspiration, cumu- 
lative, 228. 

Assimiliition, influence of, in pro- 
ducing textual variations, 95sq. 



Assyria, chronology of, 203. 

Athanasius, canon of the New Tes- 
tament, 71. 

Augustine, on canon of' the New 
Testament, 71. 

Authority, divine, claimed for the 
Bible, 26sq. ; by Paul, 26 : by 
Peter, 28 ; objections to Paul's 
claim of, 29sq., 211 ; by the Book 
of Revelation, 32 ; by Peter for 
Paul, 29, 32, 44; thought to be 
disclaimed by Paul, 29sq. 

Bannerman, Professor, quoted, 51, 
52. 

Barnabas, Epistle of, 75, 81, 155. 

Barnabas, miracles of, 23. 

Baxter's Saints' Rest, compared 
with Ecclesiastes, 210. 

Beza's manuscript, age of, 87. 

Bible, divine authority for the, 
claimed by Paul, 26 ; by Peter, 
28 ; the intelligibility of the, 146, 
148 ; Harmony of the, with sci- 
ence, 195-203 ; chronology of the, 
indefinite, 201, 202 ; variety in 
the, 219 ; its power to interest, 
220 ; its unity, 221 ; its accuracy, 
221 ; its unity in diversity, 222sq. ; 
its freedom from error, 222, 227 ; 
free from discrepancies, 223, 227 ; 
commentaries upon, 225. 

Biblical interpretation, 101. 

Bissell, Professor E. C, on the 
Apocrypha, 66sq. 

Bohl, Professor, on the Aramaic 
translation in the time of Christ, 
194. 

Brevity of the reports of Christ's 
discourses, 176sq. 

Buxtorfs, 161. 

Caiaphas, 123. 

Calvin as a commentator, 140, 141. 
Canaanites, destruction of, 215. 
Canon, definition of, 55 ; relation 

of the persecutions of Antiochus 

Epiphanes to the, 69. 
Canon of the New Testament, 

chapter on, 69-84 ; not dependent 

233 



234 



INDEX. 



on the action of councils, 69 ; 
relation of, to the persecution of 
Diocletian, 69 ; Eusebius on, 70 ; 
testimony of the second century 
concerning, 71sq. ; of the Syriac 
Version, 73; of the Muratorian 
Canon, 73 ; of the church fathers, 
74. 

Canon of the Old Testament, chap- 
ter on, 55-68 ; the JcAvish, 57 ; 
witnessed to by the Book of Eo- 
clesiasticus, oS ; by the Apocry- 
pha, 59sq.; bv Josephus,61sq. ; by 
Philo, 64; Melito, 64; Origen, 
65 ; Jeronje, 65 ; the Talmud, 65 ; 
the Council of Trent, 67 ; relation 
of the persecution of Antiochus 
Epiphanes to, 69. 

Carpzovs, 161. 

Cherith, Elijah at, 186. 

Christ, supernatural character of, 
15sq.; promises inspiration, 18sq.; 
endorsf^s the Old Testament, 
24sq., 56sq.; neglect of apocalyn- 
tic literature, 47 ; did not accom- 
modate the Scriptures, 48sq. ; 
as an interpreter of the Old Tes- 
tament, llOsq., 114 ; foreshad- 
owed by types, lllsq. ; types 
referring to, lllsq. ; priesthood 
of, 112 ; genealogy of, 120, 201 ; 
as a teacher, 123sq. ; his use of 
parables, 124, 126; his teachings 
imperfectly understood by the 
disciples, 124 ; his views of the 
second coming, 130 ; on demoni- 
acal possession, 168; heals Peter's 
wife's mother, 171 ; stills the tem- 
pest, .172 ; and the rich young 
man, 175 ; and the Pharisees on 
divorce, 176. 

Christianity, supernatural, 15, 152. 

Chronology of the Bible and sci- 
ence, compareti, 200-203 ; indeti- 
niteness of the biblical, 201, 202. 

Clark, Edson L., on Genesis and 
geology, 200sq. 

Clement, Epistle of, 75, 155. 

Clement of Alexandria on the Book 
of Hebrews, 75 ; on Jude, 77 ; on 
Second and Third John and 
Second Peter, 78 ; on Revelation, 
78; quoted Epistle of Barnabas, 
81 ; abounds in quotations from 
the New Testament, 86 ; on the 
New Testament, 154. 

Cobbe, Frances Power, quoted, 158. 

Comforter, office of the, 19sq. 

Commentaries upon the Bible, 225 ; 
the newest, not the best, 140. 

Consciousness, the ethico-relig- 
ious, 149. 



Conservatism, true, 131. 

Context should be considered, 142, 

• 145. 

Cook, Canon, on Second Peter, 78sq. 

Copernicus, 141. 

Cosmogony, biblical, 197. 

Cowles, Professor Henry, on Dan- 
iel, 113. 

Creation, mode of, not asserted in 
the Bible, 48. 

Criticism, Textual, and Inspira- 
tion, chapter on, 85-100 ; neces- 
sity for, 85 ; materials for, 86 ; 
quotations and versions, 86, 97, 
99 ; manuscripts, 87 ; much of it 
trivial, 88sq., 132, 228 ; important 
results of, 91sq., 141 ; scientitic 
basis of, 94sq. ; rules of, 95. 

Cross^ inscriptions on, 177. 

Cumulative argument for inspira- 
tion, 228. 

Darwinism and Genesis, 198. 

Day, meaning of, in Genesis, 196. 

Dead, prayers for the, inculcated 
in the Apocrypha, 67, 83. 

Demoniacal possession, 166sq. 

Design, full, of an evejit, sum of 
all its uses, 118 ; God's, compre- 
hensive, 1.58, 205sq. 

De Wette, typical character of the 
Old Testament, 114. 

Didymus, on Second Peter, 78. 

Difficulties, inherent, 157-170, 20-Jsq. 

Diocletian, relation of his persecu- 
tions to the canon, 69. 

Dionysius of Alexandria on the 
Bevelation of John, 80. 

Discrepancies, 121, 134sq. ; Alleged 
verbal, chapter on, 171-183 ; 
Bible, free from, 223, 227. 

Diseases, mental, 167. 

Divorce, 176. 

Doctrines, evangelical, 147. 

Doketae, view of Christ's nature, 
160, 161. 

Egypt, chronology of, 203. 

Elijah, a type of John the Baptist, 

113 ; during the famine, 1^5sq. 
Elisha and the forty children, 1.13. 
Elohim., meaning of, 121, 190. 
Ecclesiastes compared with Bax* 

ter's Saints' Rest, 210. 
Enoch, Booiv of, quoted by Judo, 

47. 
Ephraem manuscript, age of, 87. 
Error, alleged, explained, 162, 

171sq. ; freedom of the Bible 

from, 222, 227. 
Esther compared with Pilgrim's 

Progress, 210. 



INDEX. 



235 



Ethico-religious consciousness, 149. 
Eiisebius, canon of, 70 ; on Epistle 

of James, 77 ; on Shepherd of 

Hermas, 81. 
Evangelical doctrines, 147. 
Evolution and the Bible, 198. 

Fairbairn, Professor Patrick, on 
quotations from the Old Testa- 
ment in the New, 191, 193. 

Fathers of the second century, 
value of their testimony con- 
cerning the canon, 71sq., 154. 

Final cause of Old Testament his- 
tory, 117sq. 

Forgery, Second Peter not a, 79 ; 
unsuccessful attempts at, 81. 

Genealogical tables, use of, 216. 

Genealogy, of Christ, 120, 201 ; of 
Melchizedek, 122. 

Genesis and geology, 195-200. 

Geology and the Bible, 195-200. 

Gesenius on the meaning of Elohim, 
190. 

Glacial period, date of, 203. 

Gospels, application of the Old 
Testament prophecies in the, 
117sq. 

Grammars, use of, 133. 

Greek, the, of the New Testament, 
143 ; not spoken by Christ, 173. 

Guyot, Professor Arnold, on Gene- 
sis and geology, 197 ; on evolu- 
tion, 198. 

Hagiographa, 46. 

Harmony, of the Gospels, 183 ; of 
the Bible with science, chapter 
on, 195-203. 

Hebrews, Epistle to the, testimony 
concerning its canonicity, 75sq. ; 
relation of, to Paul, 82, 108 ; char- 
acter of, 121sq.; quotations in 
from the Old Testament, 121sq., 
189. 

Hermeneutics, of the Rabbis, 108 ; 
of Paul, 108, 114 ; of the Book of 
HebrcAvs, 108 ; proper method of, 
llOsq. ; of Christ, 112-114 ; for- 
mula for, 141. 

Holy Spirit, special promise of the, 
to the apostles, 19sq. 

Hort. See Westcott. 

Huinilitv necessary to an inter- 
preter', 102, 205, 230. 

Imprecatory Psalms, 213sq. 
Incarnation, analogous to inspira- 
tion, 211. 
Incomprehensibility of God, 124, 



Induction, method of, 218 ; inspira- 
tion proved by, 219sq., 228sq. 

Infallibility, sphere of, 14, 101, 149 ; 
not possessed by interpreters, 
101, 148. 

Inspiration, defined, 14, 101 ; prom- 
ise of, 18sq., 152 ; claimed by the 
apostles, 26sq., 153 ; objections to 
Paul's claim of, 29sq., 211 ; of the 
Old Testament, 35sq.; of the 
Bible confirmed by its typical 
language, 123 ; argument for, 151- 
156 ; mode of, 157, 159sq. ; doc- 
trine of, analogous to that of 
design, 157sq., 204 ; produces va- 
riety and makes the Bible an 
organic whole, 209sq. ; human 
elements in, 211 ; analogous to 
incarnation, 211 ; does not imply 
omniscience, 212 ; proved by in- 
duction, 219sq. ; argument for, 
cumulative, 228. 

Intelligibility of the Bible, 148. 

Interpretation, biblical, 101 ; prov- 
ince of, 104 ; of illustrations, 208 ; 
of Job, 209 ; of Proverbs, 209 ; the 
true basis of doctrine, 232. 

Interpretation of the Old Testa- 
ment by Christ, 49, llOsq. ; by 
Paul, 108, 114sq.; by the apostles, 
llOsq. ; by the apostolic church, 
122. 

Interpretation of Scripture, chap- 
ter on, 101-150 ; rules of, 105sq. ; 
of the obscure by the plain, 106 ; 
of Scripture by Scripture, 107, 
126sq. 

Irenseus, on Hebrews, 76 ; referred 
to Epistle of James, 77; on Second 
John, 78 ; on Revelation of John, 
80 ; on Shepherd of Hermas, 81 ; 
quotes much from the New Tes- 
tament, 86 ; on the New Testa- 
ment, 154. 



James, Epistle of, canonicity, 77, 
82. 

Jericho, blind men at, 134. 

Jerome, on the canon of the Old 
Testament, 65 ; on the canon of 
the New, 71 ; on the Revelation 
of John, 80. 

Jerusalem, destruction of, 125. 

Jesus, son of Sirach, views of the 
Old Testament, 68. 

Job, interpretation of, 209. 

John, contemporaries of, 71 ; Sec- 
ond and Third Epistles of, can- 
onicity of, 77 ; Revelation of, 
79sq. 

Jonah, story of, defended, 213. 



236 



INDEX. 



Josephus, on the Old Testament, 

61sq. 
Jude, Epistle of, canoiiicity, 77, 82. 
Jude, relation of, to James, 77, 82. 
Justin Martyr, 79, 86, 154. 

Ladd, Rev. George T., his views on 
the canon criticised, 58 ; his views 
respecting the ability of the Ncav 
Testament writers to interpret 
the Old, criticised, 108sq. ; on al- 
leged discrepancies, 175sq. ; on 
alleged errors in quotation, 184. 

Language, pregnant, 123 ; elasticity 
of, 132sq., 142, 171, 174, 196 ; can 
convey deliiiite truth, 138, 146; 
changes in, 143 ; deterioration of, 
144. 

Lexicons, use of, 132, 133. 

Lightfoot. his views of the word 
Scripture criticised, 41. 

Luke represents Paul, 82. 

Manuscripts of the New Testament 
enumerated, 87. 

Mark represents Peter, 82. 

Mediums, so-called, 164. 

Melchizedek, type of Christ, 111, 
122 ; genealogy of, omitted in 
Genesis, 122. 

Melito, on the canon of the Old 
Testament, 64. 

Miracles, an essential element of 
Christianity, 15sq.; power of per- 
forming, conferred on the apos- 
tles, 19 ; number of, performed 
bv the apostles, 20 ; bv Peter, 21 : 
by Stephen, 22 ; by Philip, 22 ; 
by Paul, 23sq. ; by Barnabas, 23 ; 
by the author of the Book of He- 
brcAvs, 24. 

Mosaic code, humaneness of, 214. 

Muratorian Canon, books con- 
tained in, 73sq. ; did not contain 
Hebrews, 76 ; contains Jude, 77 ; 
did not contain Epistle of James, 
77 ; on Kevelation, 80 ; on Shep- 
herd of Hermas, 81. 

Nature, cruelty of, 216. 

Nazareth, derivation of, 118. I 

Neptune, discovery of, 226. 

New Testament, supernatural ele- j 

ment of, 15sq. ; apostolic author- i 

ship of, 82 ; language of, 143 ; 

character of, 154. 
Noah began to be an husbandman, 

185. 

Old Testament, supernatural ele- 
ment of, 15sq. ; inspiration of, 
assorted by the New, 35sq., 53, 



153 ; asserted by the writers 
themselves, 50sq. ; threefold di- 
vision of, 46, 56sq. ; books of, 
enumerated, 57 ; typical Charac- 
ter of. lllsq. ; relation of, to the 
New, 120, 123. 
Origen. on the canon of the Old 
Testament, 65 ; on the Book of 
Hebrews, 76; on Jude, 77; on Sec- 
ond Peter, 78 ; on Eevelation of 
John, 80 ; quotes Epistle of Bar- 
nabas, 81 ; quotes Shepherd of 
Hermas, 81 ; abounds in quota- 
tions from the New Testament, 86. 

Pantaenus on the Book of He- 
brews, 75. 

Parables, use of, 126. 

Parallelisms between the Old Tes- 
tament and the historv of Christ, 
118. 

Passover, time of the last, 135sq. ; 
elasticity of the word, 137. 

Paul, miracles of, 23sq. ; inspira- 
tion of, objected to, 29sq., 211 ; 
inspiration claimed by Peter for, 
29sq. ; thought to disclaim inspi- 
ration, 29sq. ; his method of in- 
terpretation, 108, 11-lsq. ; his 
quotations from the Old Testa- 
ment, llosq. ; his anticipations 
of Christ's second coming, 126sq. 

Perfection, relative character of, 
101, 205. 

Peter, miracles of, 21sq. ; his wife's 
mother healed, 171. 

Peter, Second, canonicity of, 78. 

Philip, miracles of, 22. 

Philo, his reverence for the Old 
Testament, 64 ; his neglect of the 
Apocrypha, 64. 

Pilgrnn's Progress compared with 
Esther, 210. 

TTverna, 111. 

Presumptions favoring the doc- 
trine of inspiration, 17, 73. 

Priesthood of Christ, 112. 

Proof, burden of, 131, 155, 183. 

Prophecy, foreshortened view of, 
125. 

Protestantism, theology of, inde- 
pendent of the Apocrypha, 83 ; 
vicAvs respecting the Bible, 148. , 

Proverbs, Book of, interpretation 
of, 209. 

Purgatory, doctrine of, inculcated 
by the Apocrypha, 67, 83. 

Quenstedt, 161. 

Quotations, from the Old Testa- 
ment in the New, 34, 47. lllsq.; 
almost none from other books, 



INDEX. 



237 



47; books of the Old Testament 
not quoted in the NeAV, 55 ; for- 
mulas of, 117 ; difficult of expla- 
nation, 120; Alleged errors in, 
chapter on, 184-194. 

Rabbins, hernienentical method of, 
108 ; partially endorsed by Paul, 
117. 

Resurrection of Christ, evidential 
value of, 16sq. 

Revelation, manifold character of, 
102 ; difficulties of a written, 104. 

Revelation of John, claims divine 
authority, 32 ; its canonicity, 79. 

Row, Rev. C. A., his views of in- 
spiration criticised, 30sq. 

Rudimentary organs, 204 ; ideal 
value of, 207. 

Salem, 122. 

Science, and the Bible, chapter on, 
195-203 ; chronology of the Bible 
compared with that of, 200-203. 

Scripture, use of the word, in the 
time of Christ, 37sq. ; the singu- 
lar means the same as the plural, 
40sq. 

Second century, testimony of the, 
to the canon, 71sq. ; value of this 
testimony, 72, 153. 

Second coming of Christ, Paul's 
anticipation of, 126sq. 

Seed, ditference in meaning of the 
singular and plural, 116. 

Seeds, transportation of, 206. 

Septuagint, 65. 

Sermon on the Mount, 49sq., 181sq. 

Sewall, Professor J. B., 214. 

Shepherd of Hermas, not canoni- 
cal, 75, 81. 

Sinaitic manuscript contains Epis- 
tle of Barnabas and the Shep- 
herd of Hermas, 81 ; age of, 87 ; 
value of, 94sq., 99. 

Sodom and Gomorrah, destruction 
of, 216. 

Solomon's Songs compared with 
Westminster Catechism, 210. 

Spiritualists, doctrine of, 164. 

Stuart, Professor Moses, on the 
inspiration of Paul, 29 ; on the 
Old Testament, 45sq. ; on quota- 
tions in Hebrews, 192. 

Supernatural, extent of the, in the 
Bible, 15sq., 152. 

Syriac Version, books contained 
in, 73 ; cojitains Hebrews, 75 ; 
does not contain Jude, 77 ; con- 
tains James, 77; does not contain 
Revelation, 80. 



Talmud, composition of, 47 ; on the 
canon of the Old Testament, 65. 

Tempest, account of stilling of, 
172. 

Tertullian on Hebrews, 76 ; on 
Jude, 77 ; on the Shepherd of 
Hermas, 81; abounds in quota- 
tions from the New Testament, 
S6. 

Tholuck, quoted, 117. 

Tischendorf , discovers the Sinaitic 
manuscript, 87 ; his critical Greek 
Testament, 88. 

Toy, Professor C. H., his view of 
Hebrews criticised, 108 ; his views 
of the inability of the New Tes- 
tament writers to interpret the 
Old criticised, 108sq. ; on New 
Testament quotations, 189sq. 

Tradition, limits within which it is 
authoritative, 71sq., 154. 

Translation, difficulty of, 188. 

Translations. See Versions. 

Tregelles. rank as a textual critic, 
99. 

Trent, council of, on the canon, 
66sq. 

Types of the Old Testament, lllsq., 
121. 

Unity of the Bible, 221. 
Uslier, Archbishop, chronology of, 
201. 

Variations in the text of the New 
Testament, number of, 88 ; most- 
ly trivial, 88 ; the more important 
enumerated, 91sq. ; origin of, 
95sq. 

Vatican manuscript, age of, 87 ; 
value of, 94, 99. 

Versions of the Old Testament, 
Greek, 65 ; Syriac, 73, 75, 86 ; 
Latin, 73, 86; Egyptian, 86; 
English, 227. 

V^ulgate, endorsed by the Council 
of Trent, 68. 

Waste in nature, 205. 
Westminster Catechism compared 

with Solomon's Songs, 210. 
Westcott and Hort, on the Greek 

text of the New Testament, 90. 
Westcott's Epistles of St. John, 78, 
Wharton, Rev. Francis, on words, 

139sq. 
Word, analogy between the written 

and the incarnate, 103. 

Zarephath, Elijah at, 186. 



INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES. 



PAGE 

Genesis i 196 

i. 1, 20, 21, 27 198 

ii. 4 196 

ix. 20, 21 185 

X. 15-18 202 

xii. 3 .;..... . 39 

XV. 6 40 

XV. 16 214 

xxi. 10, 12 39 

xxi. 10 114 

Exodus iii. 5 103 

iii. 6 36, 113 

iv. 12 50 

ix. 16 36 

xii. 49 214 

xxii. 21 214 

xxiii. 9, 12 214 

xxiii. 18 137 

xxvi. 6 217 

xxxiii. 19 36 

xxxiv. 16 50 

Leviticus xi. 5 , . \ ; . . 165 

xviii. 5 36 

xix. 18 40 

xxiv. 22 214 

Numbers ix. 14 214 

XV. 15, 16, 29 214 

xvi. 28 50 

XXXV. 15 214 

Deuteronomy i, 16 214 

ix. 1 196 

X. 18, 19 214 

XXV. 4 39, 115 

xxvi. 12 214 

xxxii. 21 36 

xxxii. 43 189 

1 Samuel xxiv., xxvi. . . . 214 

2 Samuel xxii. 3 121 

xxiii. 2 ....... . 51 

1 Chronicles iii. 11, 12 . . . 201 

vi. 7-11 201 

xxvi. 24 202 



PAGE 

2 Chronicles xxx. 18, 22 . . . 137 

1 Kings xvii. 1 186 

xvii. 9 If 185 

xviii. 1 186 

xix. 10, 14 39 

xix. 18 36 

xxi. 2 134 

Ezra ix. 1-4 51 

Neliemiah viii. 1 51 

Job XX. 15 121 

Psalms viii 190 

viii. 5 121 

xvi. 10 116 

xl. 6-8 192 

xlv. 6, 7 122 

Ixxxii. 6 190 

xcv. 11 122 

xcvi. 5 121 

xcvii. 7 121, 189 

cii. 25-27 121 

ex 36, 111, 112 

ex. 1 122 

ex. 4 111,122 

cxviii 38 

cxviii. 22 40 

cxviii. 27 137 

cxix 63 

cxxxviii. 1 121 

Ecclesiastes iv. 4 40 

Proverbs xxi. 31 120 

Isaiah i. 2 51 

i.3 42 

iv. 2 118 

vii. 14-16 119 

viii. 17, 18 121 

xi. 1 118 

xxviii. 16 40 

xxix. 13 187 

xxix. 18 112 

xxxv. 8 102 

liii. 7 39 



INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES. 



239 



Isaiali liii. 12 112 

liv. 1 114 

Iviii. 6 112 

Ixi. 1, 2 112 

Jeremiah i. 4 51 

xvii. 25 120 

xxiii. 5 ........ . 118 

Daniel ix. 26, 27 113 

ix. 27 112 

xi. 31 112 

xii. 11 .' . . 112 

Hosea xi. 1 118 

xiv. 3 120 

Zechariali iii. 8 118 

vi. 12 118 

ix. 9 120 

xiii. 7 112 

Malachi ii. 3 137 

iii. 1 97 

Matthew i. 1-17 201 

i. 22, 23 119 

i. 22 117 

ii.15 117 

ii. 23 118 

iii. 17 98 

iv. 14 117 

iv. 24 167 

v.-vii 181 

V. 22 92 

viii. 15 171 

viii. 25 ........ 172 

viii. 29 .167 

viii. 31 168 

viii. 33 96 

X. 1 19 

X. 8 168 

X. 9, 10 178 

X. 19, 20 19 

xi. 10 97 

xi. 13 46 

xii. 24-32 168 

xii. 43 sq 168 

xiii. 13 124 

xiii. 14 36 

xiii. 31, 32 165 

xiii. 55 77 

XV. 4 '35 

XV. 9 187 

xvi., xxiv 125 

xvi. 28 127 

xviii. 20 95 

xviii. 28 96 

xix. 7 176 

xix. 17 175 

XX. 29-34 134 

xxi. 4 ........ 117 



Matthew xxi. 42 38, 43 

xxii. 29 ....... 43 

xxii. 31 36 

xxii. 32 113 

xxii. 40 46 

xxii. 43 36, 111 

xxiii. 35 57 

xxiv 130 

xxiv. 15 112 

xxiv. 34 127 

xxiv. 36 110 

xxiv. 37 sq 184 

XXV. 6 95 

xxvi. 2 137 

xxvi. 17-30 136 

xxvi. 18, 19 137 

xxvi. 24, 54, 56 113 

xxvi. 31 112 

xxvi. 54 43 

xxvi. 56 43, 44 

xxvii. 37 177 



Mark i. 2 . 
i. 11 . . 
i. 24, 25 
i. 31 . . 
i. 32 . . 
iii. 22-30 
iv. 31 . 
iv. 38 . 



V. 7 



V. 12 

vi. 8, 9 

vii. 10 

ix. 13 

ix. 28, 29 . . . . 

X. 3 

X. 18 

X. 46-52 .... 
xii. 10, 11 . . . . 

xii. 26 

xii. 36 

xiii. 11 

xiv. 12-26 .... 

xiv. 12 

xiv. 49 

XV. 26 . . . . . 

xvi. 10-20 92 



36, 



97 
98 
167 
171 
167 
168 
165 
172 
167 
168 
178 
36 
113 
168 
176 
175 
134 
38 
36 
111 
19 
136 
137 
117 
177 
,93 



Luke i. 51-55 35 

iv. 18, 19 112 

iv. 21 41 

iv. 25-27 185 

iv. 39 171 

iv. 41 167 



vi. 17-49 . . . 


. ... 181 


vi. 17, 18 . . . 


... 167 


vii. 27 .... 


. . . . 97 


viii. 24 ... . 


. ... 172 


viii. 32 ... . 


... 168 


viii. 34 ... . 


... 96 


ix. 1 


... 19 



240 



INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES. 



Luke ix. 3 178 

X 7 39 

x! 17-20* ['.'.'.'.'.'. 168 

X. 17 2-0 

X. 18 sq 168 

xi. 15-23 168 

xii. 11, 12 19 

xvi. 16 46 

xvi. 29, 31 46 

xvi. 31 45 

xviii. 19 175 

xviii. 35-43 134 

xix. 1 134 

XX. 17 38 

XX. 37 36 

XX. 42 36, 111 

xxi. 14, 15 19 

xxii. 1-20 136 

xxii. 1 ....... . 137 

xxii. 7 137 

xxii. 8, 13 137 

xxii. 37 112 

xxiii. 38 177 

xxiv. 27, 44, 45 43 

xxiv. 27, 44 56, 113 

xxiv. 27 46 

xxiv. 44 46 

xxiv. 53 96 

John i. 14 79 

i. 45 46 

i. 46 118 

ii. 13 137 

ii. 19 124 

ii. 22 42 

iii. 14 113 

iv., vi 115 

V. 1 141 

V. 4 92, 137 

V. 39, 46 113 

V. 39 43 

vi. 4 137 

vii. 38, 42 42 

vii. 38 113 

vii. 40-43 38 

viii. 1-11 93 

ix. 2 119 

X 112 

X. 35 38,42,190 

xi. 50 123 

xii. 15 120 

xii. 32 124 

xii. 38 117 

xii. 39 36 

xiii.-xvii 179 

xiii. 1 135 

xiii. 18 113, 117 

xiv.-xvi 19 

xiv. 26 19 

XV. 26, 27 20 

xvi. 12-15 ....... 20 

xvii. 12 113 



John xviii. 28 .... 135, 137 

xix. 14, 31 ...... 135 

xix. 20 177 

xix. 24, 28, 36, 37 . . . 38, 117 

xix. 28 42 

xix. 35 79 

xix. 37 41 

XX. 9 38 

XX. 30, 31 174 

xxi. 22 127 

Acts i. 16 38 

ii. 34, 35 Ill 

ii. 43 21 

iii. 1-10 21 

V. 1-11 21 

V. 12-16 21 

vi. 8 22 

viii. 5-8, 13 23 

viii. 32 42 

viii. 35 . 39 

ix. 33-35 22 

ix. 36-41 22 

ix. 42 . . 22 

xiii. 11 23 

xiii. 15 46 

xiii. 35 116 

xiv. 3 23 

xiv. 10 23 

XV. 13 77 

XV. 28 26 

xvi. 16 sq 165 

xv:. 18 24 

xvii. 11 44 

xvii. 28 48 

xviii. 24, 28 44 

XX. 10, 12 24 

xxiv. 14 46 

xxviii. 1-6 24 

xxviii. 9 24 

xxviii. 23 46 

xxviii. 25 36 

Romans i. 1 27, 88 

i. 2 44 

i. 3 89 

i. 4 89 

i. 7 89, 90 

i. 8 90 

iii. 5 29 

iii. 21 46 

iv 108 

iv. 3 39, 42 

iv. 11, 17 116 

vi. 19 29 

ix. 8,9,13,15, 17,25,29,33 . 116 

ix. 15 36 

ix. 17 36, 39, 42 

X. 5 36 

X. 11 39, 42 

X. 19 36 

xi. 2 , . . 39, 42 



INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES. 



241 



Romans xi. 4 . • 36 

XV. 4 44 

XV. 10 37 

XV. 18, 19 25 

xvi. 26 44 

1 Corinthians i. 1 27 

i. 14-17 212 

V. 7 137 

vii. 6 29 

vii. 12 30 

vii. 25 30 

vii. 40 30 

ix. 1, 2 27 

ix. 9, 10 115 

x. 1-4 115 

xiii 144 

xiv. 37 28 

XV. 3, 4 44 

XV. 9 27 

XV. 51 127 

2 Corinthians i. 1 27 

vi. 16 37 

xi., xii 30 

xi. 5 27 

Xi. 17 31 

xii. 11, 12 25, 27, 31 

Galatians i. 1 ....... . 27 

i. 11, 12 28 

iii 108 

iii. 8, 22 39,42 

iii. 8 . 39, 116 

iii. 15 29 

iii. 16 115 

iii. 23 41 

iv . 108 

iv. 21-31 114 

iv. 27 114,116 

iv. 30 39, 42, 114 

Ephesians i. 1 27 

ii. 20 27 

Philippians iv. 5 127 

Colossians i. 1 27 

1 Thessalonians ii. 13 . . . . 27 

iv. 15, 17 126 

2 Thessalonians ii. 2, 3 . . . 129 

1 Timothv i. 1 27 

i. 4 ." 92 

ii. 7 27 

iii. 16 92 

V. 18 39,42,115 



1 Timothy v. 23 211 

2 Timothy i. 1, 11 27 

iii. 14-17 33, 34 

iii. 16 39, 41 

iv. 13 211 

Titus i. 1 27 

i. 12 48 

Hebrews i. 1 104, 159 

i. 6-8 37 

i. 6 121, 189 

i. 8, 9 121 

i. 10-12 121 

i. 13 36, 111, 122 

ii. 3,4 25,28 

ii. 7 121 

ii. 12 37 

ii. 13 121 

iii. 7 37 

iv. 3-5, 9, 10 122 

iv. 3, 4 37 

V. 6 37 

vii. 2, 3 122 

vii. 17 122 

X. 5, 15 37 

X. 5-10 191 

X. 34 ........ 91 

xi. 9, 10, 13-16 122 

xi. 28 137 

xii. 26 37 

xiii. 5 37 

James ii. 8, 23 40 

iv. 5 40 

1 Peter ii. 6 40, 42 

iv. 7 127 

2 Peter i. 1 79 

i. 20 40, 42 

iii. 1 79 

iii. 2 28 

iii. 8 129 

iii. 15, 16 29 

iii. 16 44 

1 John i. 1 o . . 18 

i. 2 79 

iv. 1 169 

V. 7, 8 . . . . c . . . 93 

Judel4 . 47 

Revelation i. 1-9 79 

i. 10, 11 ....... 32 

xxii. 8, 9 79 

xxii. 18, 19 32 



A BOOK FOR THE TIMES. 



AN INQUIRY CONCERNING 

THE 

Relation of Death to Probation. 

Written for the Congregational Publishing Society by 
PROF. G. FREDERICK WRIGHT, 

AUTHOR OF " THE LOGIC OF CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES," AND '' STUDIES IN 
SCIENCE AND RELIGION." 

Post-paid, 75 cents. 

" If you like a book wliicli takes hold of its subject with a grip and handles 
it fairly and handsomely, and at the same time positively and thoroughly, 
you have it here. Few men are entitled to speak with so much weight on the 
point as Professor Wright. He is a confessed expert, a scientist in high stand- 
ing. We commend the volume heartily to our readers, whatever their present 
opinions upon its subject." — Congregationalist. 

'* We highly commend it for its faithful and clear presentation of the 
Scriptural teaching on this subject. Of course, this would be that there is no 
warrant in Scripture for believing that there is probation after death, but 
that the awards of the Judgment Day are endless." — National Baptist, Phila, 

'* This is a very clear, Scriptural, satisfactory discussion of a difficult sub- 
ject. It is an especial tract for the hour, and should be widely circulated." 
— Zlon's Herald. 

*'This book is serviceable as a fair, simple, and earnest statement of the 
usual doctrine of Future Punishment." — Literary World. 

"The position of the author is highly conservative, especially in the dis- 
cussion of proof-texts, and he contends for the received opinion that pro- 
bation ends with death with a keen, practical appreciation of the homiletic 
importance of that doctrine.''— Independent, Neio York. 

" It discusses the questions that have been suggested in regard to a possible 
probation between death and the judgment, especially for those who have 
not had the motives of the gospel presented to them in this life. In it the 
reader will find the Scriptural aspect of the subject of eternal punishment 
presented so briefly, so clearly, so conclusively, that to avoid the issue he 
must make some compromise with his faith in the Word of God." — Observer, 
Neio York. 

For Sale by all Booksellers, or sent, post-paid, on 
receipt of price, by 

Congregational Publishing Society, Boston. 

OEO. P. SMITH, Agent. 



Christ Preaching to Spirits 
IN Prison. 

BY KEY. WILLIAM DE LOSS LOYE. 
Postpaid, 90 cents. 



'^We heartily commend tlie volume as an able, somewhat 
original, and thoroughly candid discussion. The author's treat- 
ment of the former passage is especially skilful, and the ability 
with which he has presented his views will be recognized by all 
who have given the subject close attention. The book is brief, 
but comprehensive. It is one of the most useful which the 
recent discussions of its subject have called out, and it deserves 
careful study." — Congregationallst. 

" The essay is valuable for its scope in gathering the litera- 
ture of the subject, as well as for its special theory of inter- 
preting this somewhat difficult Scripture." — Zion^s Herald, 

' ' The work has the indorsement of Professor Tyler, of Am- 
herst, for strength of material and originality of method — an 
opinion in which the public will fully concur." — Advance. 

"His argument is written with his characteristic fidelity and 
painstaking study, making it worthy of a most careful perusal." 

— Sun day-school Wo rid. 

"We recommend this book to siny who are in doubt on this 
important subject. Not only has the author demonstrated that 
it is not necessary to write a folio volume in order to show broad 
scholarship, but, far more important, he has proved that the 
oracles of God yield their true meaning to patient and devout 
study." — Northainpton Gazette and Courier. 
^ " It is an able discussion of the knotty and long-debated ques- 
tion, with fresh views upon collateral points in eschatology." — 
Illustrated Christian Weekly. 

"The argument is supported with much learning, and shows 
great research and study. It is altogether the most rational and 
scripturally truthful presentation of the subject yet made." — 
Holyoke Transcript. 

"We have found it to be learned, ingenious, and interesting." 

— Christian Advocate. 

"It displays careful research and comparison among the 
authorities."— Springfield Republican. 



CONGREGATIONAL SUNDAY-SCHOOL AND PUBLISHING 
SOCIETY. 



SABBATH ESSAYS. 



WORK OF permanp:nt value on a theme 

OF VITAL IMPORTANCE. 
Price, $1.50. 

As a treatise on the Sabbath, designed to meet all ordinary 
inquiries on the subject, it will be invaluable to Pastors, Sabbath- 
ScJiool Teachers, Public and Private Libraries. It is the most 
valuable contribution recently made to the literature on the Sabbath 
question. 

The book contains thirty-eight essays and addresses, discussing 
the Sabbath in thirty-eight different aspects and relations. The 
essays are divided into sections, as follows: ''The Sabbath in 
Nature," "The Sabbath in the Word of God," "The Sabbath in 
History," "The Sabbath in the State and in Society." The 
addresses follow, twelve in number, most of them on practical 
questions of Sabbath observance. A Historical Sketch on Sabbath 
Conventions closes the volume. The views of some of the foremost 
men of all the evangelical denominations are here brought together, 
presenting this great subject on all sides, furnishing a discussion 
that seems complete, and making the volume an invaluable text- 
book on the Sabbath question. 

For Sale by all Booksellers, or sent, post-paid,- on 
receipt of price, hy 

Congregational Publishing Society, Boston. 

GEO. P. SMITH, Agent. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



r -V? 




















21^ 






